Wangrode6554

Cervical radiculopathy is characterized by neurological dysfunction caused by compression and inflammation of the spinal nerves or nerve roots of the cervical spine. It mainly presents with neck and arm pain, sensory loss, motor dysfunction, and reflex changes according to the dermatomal distribution. The most common causes of cervical radiculopathy are cervical disc herniation and cervical spondylosis. It is important to find the exact symptomatic segment and distinguish between conditions that may mimic certain cervical radicular compression syndromes through meticulous physical examinations and precise reading of radiographs. Non-surgical treatments are recommended as an initial management. Surgery is applicable to patients with intractable or persistent pain despite sufficient conservative management or with severe or progressive neurological deficits. Cervical radiculopathy is treated surgically by anterior and/or posterior approaches. The appropriate choice of surgical treatment should be individualized, considering the patient's main pathophysiology, specific clinical symptoms and radiographic findings thoroughly.Spine diseases are common and exhibit several causes, including degeneration, trauma, congenital issues, and other specific factors. Most people experience a variety of symptoms of spine diseases during their lifetime that are occasionally managed with conservative or surgical treatments. Accurate diagnosis of the spine pathology is essential for the appropriate management of spine disease, and various imaging modalities can be used for the diagnosis, including radiography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and other studies such as EOS, bone scan, single photon emission CT/CT, and electrophysiologic test. Patient (or case)-specific selection of the diagnostic modality is crucial; thus, we should be aware of basic information and approaches of the diagnostic modalities. In this review, we discuss in detail, about diagnostic modalities (radiography, CT, MRI, electrophysiologic study, and others) that are widely used for spine disease.Vertebral fractures are the most common type of osteoporotic fracture and can increase morbidity and mortality. To date, the guidelines for managing osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs) are limited in quantity and quality, and there is no gold standard treatment for these fractures. Conservative treatment is considered the primary treatment option for OVFs and includes pain relief through shortterm bed rest, analgesics, antiosteoporotic drugs, exercise, and braces. Studies on vertebral augmentation (VA) including vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty have been widely reported, but there is still debate and controversy regarding the effectiveness of VA when compared with conservative treatment, and the routine use of VA for OVF is not supported by current evidence. Although most OVFs heal well, approximately 15%-35% of patients with unstable fractures, chronic intractable back pain, severely collapsed vertebra (leading to neurological deficits and kyphosis), or chronic pseudarthrosis frequently require surgery. Given that there is no single technique for optimizing surgical outcomes in OVFs, tailored surgical techniques are needed. Surgeons need to pay attention to advances in osteoporotic spinal surgery and should be open to novel thoughts and techniques. Prevention and management of osteoporosis is the key element in reducing the risk of subsequent OVFs. Bisphosphonates and teriparatide are mainstay drugs for improving fracture healing in OVF. The effects of bisphosphonates on fracture healing have not been clinically evaluated. The intermittent administration of teriparatide significantly enhanced spinal fusion and fracture healing and reduced mortality risk. Based on the current literature, there is still a lack of standard management strategies for OVF. There is a need for greater efforts through multimodal approaches including conservative treatment, surgery, osteoporosis treatment, and drugs that promote fracture healing to improve the quality of the guidelines.As subjects of the clinical trial, 44 samples of paraffin-fixed tissue were used from patients diagnosed with "colorectal cancer." In the course of clinical trials, 44 samples of paraffin-fixed tissue were analyzed in two series of experiments, that is, 88 clinical-laboratory experiments were carried out, of which 48 experiments with genomic DNA samples with the established negative status of the presence of KRAS gene mutations and 40 experiments with genomic DNA samples with the established positive status of the presence of KRAS gene mutations. Analysis and evaluation of the results of clinical laboratory tests of the medical product "Kit of Reagents for Determination of the Status of KRAS Gene Mutations by PCR-RV Method in a Sample of Human Genomic DNA from Samples of Paraffin-Fixed Tissue (Test-KRAS-tissue) according to TU 21.20.23-006-97638376-2016 "confirmed that it allows to carry out qualitative determination of the status of six mutations of the twelfth codon (Gly12Asp, Gly12Ala, Gly12Arg, Gly12Val, Gly12Ser, Gly12Cys) and one mutation of the thirteenth codon (Gly13Asp) the KRAS gene by real-time allele-specific PCR in human genomic DNA sample from paraffin-fixed tissue samples, with high diagnostic sensitivity rates of 90.9% and diagnostic specificity of 95.0% with a confidence probability of 90%. Reproducibility of results is 100%, which confirms the high reliability of the set.In this work we tested two reagent kits developed by us for detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA using a fragment of the ORF1ab gene in digital PCR and real-time PCR formats. Data were obtained on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs of patients with COVID-19 and asymptomatic carriers. The developed reagent kits provided 100% sensitivity and a detection limit of 103 GE / ml for qPCR, and at least 200 copies / ml of viral RNA when performing digital PCR. These methods were tested using a panel of 1,328 samples collected from patients with suspected COVID-19 at the beginning of 2020 in the Russian Federation. It has been shown that dPCR is more sensitive and can be used to analyze samples with low viral load, including those from patients without clinical symptoms. dPCR significantly improves the accuracy of laboratory research and significantly reduces the number of false negative results in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. see more Determination of the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in patients with different clinical course of the disease showed that the concentration of viral RNA can sharply decrease in the first days of the disease.