Aracnoidite Adesiva Lombar

Spinal arachnoiditis, an inflammatory process involving all three meningeal layers as well as the nerve roots, is a cause of persistent symptoms in 6% to 16% of postoperative patients. Although spinal surgery is the most common antecedent associated with arachnoiditis, multiple causes have been reported, including infection, intrathecal steroids or anesthetic agents, trauma, subarachnoid hemorrhage and ionic myelographic contrast material--both oil soluble and water soluble. In the past, oil-based intrathecal contrast agents (Pantopaque) were associated with arachnoiditis especially when this material was introduced into the thecal sac and mixed with blood. Arachnoiditis is apparently rarely idiopathic. The pathogenesis of spinal arachnoiditis is similar to the repair process of serous membranes, such as the peritoneum, with a negligible inflammatory cellular exudate and a prominent fibrinous exudate. Chronic adhesive arachnoiditis of the lower spine is a myelographic diagnosis. The myelographic findings of arachnoiditis were divided into two types by Jorgensen et al. In type 1, "the empty thecal sac" appearance, there is homogeneous filling of the thecal sac with either absence of or defects involving nerve root sleeve filling. In type 2 arachnoiditis, there are localized or diffuse filling defects within the contrast column. MRI has demonstrated a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 100% in the diagnosis of arachnoiditis. The appearance of arachnoiditis on MRI can be assigned to three main groups. The MRI findings in group I are a conglomeration of adherent roots positioned centrally in the thecal sac. Patients in group II show roots peripherally adherent to the meninges--the so called empty sac. MRI findings in group III are a soft tissue mass within the subarachnoid space. It corresponds to the type 2 categorization defined by Jorgensen et al, where as the MRI imaging types I and II correspond to the myelographic type 1.

Atorvastatin versus Bezafibrate in Mixed Hyperlipidaemia : Randomised Clinical Trial of Efficacy and Safety (the ATOMIX Study)

OBJECTIVE: Combined hyperlipidaemia is a common and highly atherogenic lipid phenotype with multiple lipoprotein abnormalities that are difficult to normalise with single-drug therapy. The ATOMIX multicentre, controlled clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin and bezafibrate in patients with diet-resistant combined hyperlipidaemia. PATIENTS AND STUDY DESIGN: Following a 6-week placebo run-in period, 138 patients received atorvastatin 10mg or bezafibrate 400mg once daily in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. To meet predefined low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) target levels, atorvastatin dosages were increased to 20mg or 40mg once daily after 8 and 16 weeks, respectively. RESULTS: After 52 weeks, atorvastatin achieved greater reductions in LDL-C than bezafibrate (percentage decrease 35 vs 5; p < 0.0001), while bezafibrate achieved greater reductions in triglyceride than atorvastatin (percentage decrease 33 vs 21; p < 0.05) and greater increases in high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) [percentage increase 28 vs 17; p < 0.01 ]. Target LDL-C levels (according to global risk) were attained in 62% of atorvastatin recipients and 6% of bezafibrate recipients, and triglyceride levels <200 mg/dL were achieved in 52% and 60% of patients, respectively. In patients with normal baseline HDL-C, bezafibrate was superior to atorvastatin for raising HDL-C, while in those with baseline HDL-C <35 mg/dL, the two drugs raised HDL-C to a similar extent after adjustment for baseline values. Both drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The results show that atorvastatin has an overall better efficacy than bezafibrate in concomitantly reaching LDL-C and triglyceride target levels in combined hyperlipidaemia, thus supporting its use as monotherapy in patients with this lipid phenotype.