• Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.51-61
• /
• 2002

Purpose: The most common causes of neonatal cholestasis are neonatal hepatitis (NH) and extrahepatic biliary atresia (EHBA). Since neonatal cholestasis presents with variable expression of same pathologic process and has similar clinical, biochemical, and histologic features between EHBA and idiopathic neonatal hepatitis (NH), differential diagnosis is often difficult. We reviewed the differences of clinical characteristics and laboratory data to find out any correlation between the results of $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan and presence of acholic stool. Methods: Between June 1993 and January 2001, total 29 infants younger than 4 month-old underwent $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan. Their biochemical tests and clinical course were reviewed retrospectively. Results: Patients who had negative intestinal activity on $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan showed acholic stool and revealed higher serum direct bilirubin and urine bilirubin level. 18.2% of patients with acholic stool showed intestinal activity on $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan and 81.8% of them did not. All the patients without acholic stool showed positive intestinal activity on $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan. The result of $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan and the presence of acholic stool showed high negative correlation (r :-0.858). Patients with acholic stool and negative intestinal activity on $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan showed higher serum total bilirubin level. Patients without acholic stool and positive intestinal activity on $Tc^{99m}$ DISIDA scan showed higher serum level of ALT. Conclusion: Patients with acholic stool and negative intestinal activity showed high correlation, but 18.2% of patients with acholic stool showed positive intestinal activity. So operative cholangiogram or transcutaneous liver biopsy should be performed for confirmation.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.30 no.10
• /
• pp.1210-1219
• /
• 2001

Introduction : The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety, pullout strength and radiographic characteristics of unicortical and bicortical screws of cervical facet within cadaveric specimens and evaluate the influence of level of training on the positioning of these screws. Methods : Twenty-one cadavers, mean 78.9 years of age, underwent bilateral placement of 3.5mm AO lateral mass screw from C3-C6(n=168) using a slight variation of the Magerl technique. Intraoperative imaging was not used. The right side(unicortical) utilized only 14mm screws(effective length of 11mm) while on the left side to determine the length of the screw after the ventral cortex had been drilled. Three spine surgeons(attending, fellow, chief resident) with varying levels of spine training performed the procedure on seven cadavers each. All spines were harvested and lateral radiographs were taken. Individual cervical vertebrae were carefully dissected and then axial radiographs were taken. The screws were evaluated clinically and radiographically for their safety. Screws were graded clinically for their safety with respect to the spinal cord, facet joint, nerve root and vertebral artery. The grades consisted of the following categories : "satisfactory", "at risk" and "direct injury". Each screw was also graded according to its zone placement. Screw position was quantified by measuring a sagittal angle from the lateral radiograph and an axial angle from the axial radiograph. Pull-out force was determined for all screws using a material testing machine. Results : Dissection revealed that fifteen screws on the left side actually had only unicortical and not bicortical purchase as intended. The majority of screws(92.8%) were satisfactory in terms of safety. There were no injuries to the spinal cord. On the right side(unicortical), 98.9% of the screws were "satisfactory" and on the left side(bicortical) 68.1% were "satisfactory". There was a 5.8% incidence of direct arterial injury and a 17.4% incidence of direct nerve root injury with the bicortical screws. There were no "direct injuries" with the unicortical screws for the nerve root or vertebral artery. The unicortical screws had a 21.4% incidence of direct injury of the facet joint, while the bicortical screws had a 21.7% incidence. The majority of "direct injury" of bicortical screws were placed by the surgeon with the least experience. The performance of the resident surgeon was significantly different from the attending or fellow(p<0.05) in terms of safety of the nerve root and vertebral artery. The attending's performance was significantly better than the resident or fellow(p<0.05) in terms of safety of the facet joint. There was no relationship between the safety of a screw and its zone placement. The axial deviation angle measured $23.5{\pm}6.6$ degrees and $19.8{\pm}7.9$ degrees for the unicortical and bicortical screws, respectively. The resident surgeon had a significantly lower angle than the attending or fellow(p<0.05). The sagittal angle measured $66.3{\pm}7.0$ degrees and $62.3{\pm}7.9$ degrees for the unicortical and bicortical screws, respectively. The attending had a significantly lower sagittal angle than the fellow or resident(p<0.05). Thirty-three screws that entered the facet joint were tested for pull-out strength but excluded from the data because they were not lateral mass screws per-se and had deviated substantially from the intended final trajectory. The mean pull-out force for all screws was $542.9{\pm}296.6N$. There was no statistically significant difference between the pull-out force for unicortical($519.9{\pm}286.9N$) and bicortical($565.2{\pm}306N$) screws. There was no significant difference in pull-out strengths with respect to zone placement. Conclusion : It is our belief that the risk associated with bicortical purchase mandates formal spine training if it is to be done safely and accurately. Unicortical screws are safer regardless of level of training. It is apparent that 14mm lateral mass screws placed in a supero-lateral trajectory in the adult cervical spine provide an equivalent strength with a much lower risk of injury than the longer bicortical screws placed in a similar orientation.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.17-23
• /
• 2008

Purpose : Because there is a difference depending on the environment as for an inspection equipment the important part of bone density scan and the precision/accuracy of a tester, the management of quality must be made systematically. The equipment failure caused by overload effect due to the aged equipment and the increase of a patient was made frequently. Thus, the replacement of equipment and additional purchases of new bonedensity equipment caused a compatibility problem in tracking patients. This study wants to know whether the clinical changes of patient's bonedensity can be accurately and precisely reflected when used it compatiblly like the existing equipment after equipment replacement and expansion. Materials and methods : Two equipments of GE Lunar Prodigy Advance(P1 and P2) and the Phantom HOLOGIC Spine Road(HSP) were used to measure equipment precision. Each device scans 20 times so that precision data was acquired from the phantom(Group 1). The precision of a tester was measured by shooting twice the same patient, every 15 members from each of the target equipment in 120 women(average age 48.78, 20-60 years old)(Group 2). In addition, the measurement of the precision of a tester and the cross-calibration data were made by scanning 20 times in each of the equipment using HSP, based on the data obtained from the management of quality using phantom(ASP) every morning (Group 3). The same patient was shot only once in one equipment alternately to make the measurement of the precision of a tester and the cross-calibration data in 120 women(average age 48.78, 20-60 years old)(Group 4). Results : It is steady equipment according to daily Q.C Data with $0.996\;g/cm^2$, change value(%CV) 0.08. The mean${\pm}$SD and a %CV price are ALP in Group 1(P1 : $1.064{\pm}0.002\;g/cm^2$, $%CV=0.190\;g/cm^2$, P2 : $1.061{\pm}0.003\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.192). The mean${\pm}$SD and a %CV price are P1 : $1.187{\pm}0.002\;g/cm^2$, $%CV=0.164\;g/cm^2$, P2 : $1.198{\pm}0.002\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.163 in Group 2. The average error${\pm}$2SD and %CV are P1 - (spine: $0.001{\pm}0.03\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.94, Femur: $0.001{\pm}0.019\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.96), P2 - (spine: $0.002{\pm}0.018\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.55, Femur: $0.001{\pm}0.013\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.48) in Group 3. The average error${\pm}2SD$, %CV, and r value was spine : $0.006{\pm}0.024\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.86, r=0.995, Femur: $0{\pm}0.014\;g/cm^2$, %CV=0.54, r=0.998 in Group 4. Conclusion: Both LUNAR ASP CV% and HOLOGIC Spine Phantom are included in the normal range of error of ${\pm}2%$ defined in ISCD. BMD measurement keeps a relatively constant value, so showing excellent repeatability. The Phantom has homogeneous characteristics, but it has limitations to reflect the clinical part including variations in patient's body weight or body fat. As a result, it is believed that quality control using Phantom will be useful to check mis-calibration of the equipment used. A value measured a patient two times with one equipment, and that of double-crossed two equipment are all included within 2SD Value in the Bland - Altman Graph compared results of Group 3 with Group 4. The r value of 0.99 or higher in Linear regression analysis(Regression Analysis) indicated high precision and correlation. Therefore, it revealed that two compatible equipment did not affect in tracking the patients. Regular testing equipment and capabilities of a tester, then appropriate calibration will have to be achieved in order to calculate confidential BMD.