The role of ceramide trihexoside (globotriaosylceramide) in the diagnosis and follow-up of the efficacy of treatment of Fabry disease: a review of the literature.

Fabry disease is caused by a deficiency of a-galactosidase A which leads to the progressive intra-lysosomal accumulation of ceramide trihexoside (CTH), also known as globotriaosylceramide (Gb3), in different cell types and body fluids. The clinical manifestations are multisystemic and predominantly affect the heart, kidney and central nervous system. The role of CTH in the pathophysiological process of Fabry disease is not established, and the link between the degree of accumulation and disease manifestations is not systematic. The use of CTH as a diagnostic tool has been proposed for several decades. The recent introduction of a specific treatment for Fabry disease in the form of enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has led to the need for a biological marker, in place of a clinical sign, for evaluating the efficacy of treatment and also as a tool for following the long term effects of treatment. The ideal biomarker must adhere to strict criteria, and there should be a correlation between the degree of clinical efficacy of treatment and a change in its concentration. This review of the literature assesses the utility of CTH as a diagnostic tool and as a marker of the efficacy of ERT in patients with Fabry disease. Several techniques have been developed for measuring CTH; the principles and the sensitivity thresholds of these methods and the units used to express the results should be taken into consideration when interpreting data. The use of CTH measurement in Fabry disease should be re-evaluated in light of recent published data.

Zerebrale Probleme in der pädiatrischen Intensivmedizin [Cerebral problems in pediatric intensive care]

This paper presents a review of different methods enabling the monitoring of cerebral function in neonatal and paediatric intensive care. EEG, evoked potentials, conventional radiological studies, computerized tomography, ultrasound, intracranial pressure measurements, nuclear magnetic resonance, Doppler ultrasound, radioisotope studies, angiography, infra-red spectral analysis and last, but not least, clinical examination produce information regarding the neurological state of the patient which must be critically analysed in order to ensure optimal management of the case. Unfortunately, and in spite of impressive progress in non-invasive monitoring of the cerebral function, we are still forced to make important medical and ethical decisions without precise information about the neurological state of our patients.

Prevalence of chronic conditions – Musculoskeletal Conditions

IPH has estimated and forecast the number of adults with MSCs for the years 2010, 2015 and 2020. In the Republic of Ireland, the data are based on the Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition (SLÁN) 2007 . The data describe the number of people who report that they have experienced doctor-diagnosed MSC in the previous 12 months:     Lower back pain or any other chronic back condition     Rheumatoid arthritis (inflammation of the joints)     Osteoarthritis (arthrosis, joint degradation) Data are  available by age and sex for each Local Health Office of the Health Service Executive (HSE) in the Republic of Ireland. In Northern Ireland, the data are based on the Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06 and Understanding Society 2009. The data describe the number of adults who:     Have ever consulted a doctor about back pain     Are currently receiving treatment for musculoskeletal problems (such as arthritis, rheumatism)     Have ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that they had have arthritis? Data are available by age and sex for each Local Government District in Northern Ireland. There are significant differences between the definitions used in RoI and NI and North-South comparisons are not valid. The RoI measures relate to specific MSCs in the previous 12 months that had been diagnosed by a doctor. The NI measures relate to doctor-consultations at any time in the past, doctor-diagnosis at any time in the past and current treatment. The IPH estimated prevalence per cents may be marginally different to estimated prevalence per cents taken directly from the reference study. There are two reasons for this: 1) The IPH prevalence estimates relate to 2010 while the reference studies relate to earlier years (Northern Ireland Health and Social Wellbeing Survey 2005/06, Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition 2007, Understanding Society 2009). Although we assume that the risk of the condition in the risk groups do not change over time, the distribution of the number of people in the risk groups in the population changes over time (eg the population ages).  This new distribution of the risk groups in the population means that the risk of the condition is weighted differently to the reference study and this results in a different overall prevalence estimate. 2) The IPH prevalence estimates are based on a statistical model of the reference study. The model includes a number of explanatory variables to predict the risk of the condition. Therefore the model does not include records from the reference study that are missing data on these explanatory variables. A prevalence estimate for a condition taken directly from the reference study would include these records.

Personality Disorder: A Diagnosis for Inclusion - The Northern Ireland Personality Disorder Strategy - The Way Forward - June 2010

Personality Disorder: A Diagnosis for Inclusion - The Northern Ireland Personality Disorder Strategy - The Way Forward - June 2010