RESUMO
The use of visible light-cured (VLC) resin was evaluated in contrast to more traditional chemical-cured resins for reconstruction of the spine in experimental rats. Such procedures are used to reconstruct vertebra in humans following corpectomy for neoplastic destruction of the spine. Numerous disadvantages exist in the use of chemical-cured resins, including excessive heat generated during the polymerization, cytotoxic effects of the nonpolymerized monomers on adjacent tissues, increased risk of infection due to impaired immunity, and distortion problems with the polymers. A new visible light-cured resin, Triad, was tested for use in maxillofacial prosthetics and for vertebral body replacement in neuro-orthopedic surgery. This study evaluated the biocompatibility of the VLC resin system as a bone implant material. The results of this study have shown the VLC resins underwent polymerization without substantial exothermic reaction and the biologic testing indicated that they are nontoxic and biocompatible. Some of the advantages noticed by using VLC resin are accuracy of fit and ease of fabrication and manipulation.
Assuntos
Resinas Acrílicas , Vértebras Cervicais/cirurgia , Próteses e Implantes , Resinas Acrílicas/química , Animais , Materiais Biocompatíveis/química , Vértebras Cervicais/diagnóstico por imagem , Vértebras Cervicais/patologia , Craniotomia , Ingestão de Alimentos/fisiologia , Estudos de Avaliação como Assunto , Marcha/fisiologia , Luz , Prótese Maxilofacial , Metilmetacrilato , Metilmetacrilatos/química , Neurônios Motores/fisiologia , Músculos/inervação , Músculos/fisiologia , Neurofisiologia , Projetos Piloto , Radiografia , Ratos , Ratos Endogâmicos , Crânio/cirurgiaRESUMO
The association between factors that place patients at risk for adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and the occurrence of ADRs was examined, and a therapeutic risk-assessment model was developed. Theoretical risk factors for ADRs to digoxin and theophylline were identified through the literature by researchers at a private tertiary-care hospital. Data were then collected from two groups of 67 patient charts each during a 15-month period. One group of charts represented patients who had experienced an ADR to digoxin or theophylline. The other group represented matched control patients who had not experienced an ADR to either drug. ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modifications) ADR codes were assigned by medical records department personnel, and the ADRs were verified by using the Naranjo algorithm. Seven risk factors for each drug were found to be significantly associated with ADRs. A serum digoxin concentration greater than 2.5 ng/mL and elevated blood urea nitrogen were the two best predictors of an ADR to digoxin. The probability of experiencing an ADR to digoxin was 94.1% for a patient with both of these risk factors. A serum theophylline concentration greater than 25 micrograms/mL was the greatest predictor of an ADR to theophylline; the probability of experiencing an ADR to theophylline was 85.2% if a patient had that risk factor. The sensitivity and specificity of the therapeutic risk-assessment model were 92.9% and 61.8%, respectively, for digoxin and 95.8% and 84.0%, respectively, for theophylline. Several laboratory-based screening criteria demonstrated an ability to predict ADRs to digoxin and theophylline.