[Prophylaxis and therapy of postdural puncture headache--a critical evaluation of treatment options]

Since the first description of spinal and epidural anaesthesia, postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is a well known complication. Its prophylaxis and treatment has been studied and discussed for more than 100 years, but the evidence is still limited. Due to relatively low prevalence of PDPH, prospective RCTs are often missing, and the frequently self-limiting character of PDPH impedes an adequate interpretation of results from studies without a control group. Taking side effects and complications into account, a prophylactic treatment of PDPH cannot be recommended. In case of PDPH, non-opioid analgesics are the first choice treatment. The epidural blood patch remains the mainstay of severe PDPH therapy. Noninvasive therapies like theophylline, sumatriptan and ACTH can be an alternative. However, an evidence-based recommendation is lacking. The development of standard operating procedures for accidental dural punctures and PDPH is recommended.

[Surgical treatment options in end-stage heart failure]

Despite significant improvements in pharmacological therapy heart failure is still one of the leading causes for death in the Western World. The gold standard treatment of end-stage heart failure remains cardiac transplantation, but there is a great excess of eligible candidates compared with the low number of suitable donor organs. The variety of surgical organ preserving treatment strategies has significantly increased during the last 20 years, intenting either to delay or even to prevent the need for cardiac transplantation. An individually tailored surgical concept should be considered as an alternative in any heart failure patient who has reached the limits of pharmacologic therapy. This article gives an overview about current and potential future therapeutic options in end-stage heart failure.

Differences across health care systems in outcome and cost-utility of surgical and conservative treatment of chronic low back pain: a study protocol

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on differences across health care systems in choice and outcome of the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) with spinal surgery and conservative treatment as the main options. At least six randomised controlled trials comparing these two options have been performed; they show conflicting results without clear-cut evidence for superior effectiveness of any of the evaluated interventions and could not address whether treatment effect varied across patient subgroups. Cost-utility analyses display inconsistent results when comparing surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP. Due to its higher feasibility, we chose to conduct a prospective observational cohort study. METHODS: This study aims to examine if1. Differences across health care systems result in different treatment outcomes of surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP2. Patient characteristics (work-related, psychological factors, etc.) and co-interventions (physiotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, return-to-work programs, etc.) modify the outcome of treatment for CLBP3. Cost-utility in terms of quality-adjusted life years differs between surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP.This study will recruit 1000 patients from orthopaedic spine units, rehabilitation centres, and pain clinics in Switzerland and New Zealand. Effectiveness will be measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline and after six months. The change in ODI will be the primary endpoint of this study.Multiple linear regression models will be used, with the change in ODI from baseline to six months as the dependent variable and the type of health care system, type of treatment, patient characteristics, and co-interventions as independent variables. Interactions will be incorporated between type of treatment and different co-interventions and patient characteristics. Cost-utility will be measured with an index based on EQol-5D in combination with cost data. CONCLUSION: This study will provide evidence if differences across health care systems in the outcome of treatment of CLBP exist. It will classify patients with CLBP into different clinical subgroups and help to identify specific target groups who might benefit from specific surgical or conservative interventions. Furthermore, cost-utility differences will be identified for different groups of patients with CLBP. Main results of this study should be replicated in future studies on CLBP.

Overview of Treatment Options, Clinical Results, and Controversies in the Management of Femoroacetabular Impingement

The surgical management of symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) generally is indicated after the failure of a trial of nonsurgical treatment. Surgical planning includes an assessment of the labrochondral pathology as well as of the acetabular and proximal femoral bony deformity. Advanced articular cartilage disease generally is associated with poorer outcomes. Surgical hip dislocation and hip arthroscopy have been used, with favorable early outcomes and low complication rates. Careful patient selection is important in predicting the success of the surgical management of symptomatic FAI. A trial of nonsurgical management generally is recommended, but limited information exists regarding its success. The early outcomes of both open and arthroscopic surgical techniques demonstrate significant improvement in most patients, with relatively low rates of complications. Because poorer clinical outcomes are associated with more advanced articular cartilage degeneration, improved strategies for the earlier identification and disease staging of symptomatic patients may enhance the long-term outcomes of both nonsurgical and surgical management.

Disruption of right prefrontal cortex by low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation induces risk-taking behavior

Decisions require careful weighing of the risks and benefits associated with a choice. Some people need to be offered large rewards to balance even minimal risks, whereas others take great risks in the hope for an only minimal benefit. We show here that risk-taking is a modifiable behavior that depends on right hemisphere prefrontal activity. We used low-frequency, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to transiently disrupt left or right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) function before applying a well known gambling paradigm that provides a measure of decision-making under risk. Individuals displayed significantly riskier decision-making after disruption of the right, but not the left, DLPFC. Our findings suggest that the right DLPFC plays a crucial role in the suppression of superficially seductive options. This confirms the asymmetric role of the prefrontal cortex in decision-making and reveals that this fundamental human capacity can be manipulated in normal subjects through cortical stimulation. The ability to modify risk-taking behavior may be translated into therapeutic interventions for disorders such as drug abuse or pathological gambling.