scholarly journals Isolated Perfusion of the Upper Extremity with TNF-α – Double Venous Cannulation

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miroslav Špaček ◽  
Petr Mitáš ◽  
Michal Vočka ◽  
Lukáš Lacina ◽  
Gabriela Hodková ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Venous Cannulation ◽  
Tnf Α ◽  
Isolated Perfusion

scholarly journals Limb salvage with isolated perfusion for soft tissue sarcoma: could less TNF-α be better?

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 1061-1068 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Bonvalot ◽  
A. Laplanche ◽  
F. Lejeune ◽  
E. Stoeckle ◽  
C. Le Péchoux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Limb Salvage ◽  
Tnf Α ◽  
Isolated Perfusion

Adhesion Receptors and Cytokine Profiles in Controlled Tourniquet Ischaemia in the Upper Extremity

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 778-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. GERMANN ◽  
D. DRÜCKE ◽  
H. U. STEINAU
Keyword(s):  
Adhesion Molecules ◽  
Organ Transplantation ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Hand Surgery ◽  
Polymorphonuclear Neutrophils ◽  
Adhesion Receptors ◽  
Peripheral Tissues ◽  
Ischaemia Reperfusion ◽  
Tnf Α

Adhesion mechanisms mediated by cytokines have been recognized to play a crucial role in ischaemia–reperfusion mechanisms. Although this phenomenon has been well investigated in organ transplantation, little data is available from upper extremity surgery. Profiles of adhesion molecules (CD11/CD18), key cytokines (TNF-α and IL-1), CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes, and polymorphonuclear neutrophils were investigated following controlled tourniquet ischaemia of the upper extremity for elective hand surgery. Data suggest that relatively short periods of ischaemia activate a mediator cascade and cell–cell interactions that may be associated with adverse pathopyhsiological effects on peripheral tissues after prolonged ischaemia.

Inflammatory biomarkers increase with severity of upper-extremity overuse disorders

2007 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. 305-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Carp ◽  
Mary F. Barbe ◽  
Kathryn A. Winter ◽  
Mamta Amin ◽  
Ann E. Barr
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Early Onset ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Signs And Symptoms ◽  
Serum Levels ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Tnf Α ◽  
Ordinal Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Factor Α

MSDs (musculoskeletal disorders) from overuse are common occupational health problems that cause pain, functional loss and loss of work time. The aim of the present study was to determine whether a relationship exists between the severity of early-onset overuse-related MSDs of the upper extremity and serum levels of IL-1β (interleukin-1β), TNF-α (tumour necrosis factor-α), IL-6 (interleukin-6) and CRP (C-reactive protein). Twenty-two subjects with upper-extremity MSDs due to overuse for no longer that 12 weeks were stratified according to the severity of upper-extremity signs and symptoms as determined by a UBMA (upper-body musculoskeletal assessment). Nine asymptomatic subjects also participated. Serum cytokines were analysed using ELISA, and CRP was analysed using a laser nephelometry technique. CRP was strongly correlated, and TNF-α, IL-1β and IL-6 were moderately correlated, with UBMA scores. Only CRP and TNFα were significantly associated with UBMA scores in an ordinal logistic regression analysis in which age and BMI (body mass index) were covariates. These results are of clinical importance as they suggest that early-onset overuse-related MSDs may have an inflammatory component. The possibility of using a combination of serum biomarkers to follow the progression of overuse-related MSDs or their response to therapeutic intervention may be of interest to clinical practitioners and should be the focus of future research.

Elevated level of circulatory sTLT1 induces inflammation through SYK/MEK/ERK signalling in coronary artery disease

2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (22) ◽  
pp. 2283-2299
Author(s):  
Apabrita Ayan Das ◽  
Devasmita Chakravarty ◽  
Debmalya Bhunia ◽  
Surajit Ghosh ◽  
Prakash C. Mandal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Coronary Artery Disease ◽  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Chronic Inflammation ◽  
Ex Vivo ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Tnf Α ◽  
Artery Disease

Abstract The role of inflammation in all phases of atherosclerotic process is well established and soluble TREM-like transcript 1 (sTLT1) is reported to be associated with chronic inflammation. Yet, no information is available about the involvement of sTLT1 in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Present study was undertaken to determine the pathophysiological significance of sTLT1 in atherosclerosis by employing an observational study on human subjects (n=117) followed by experiments in human macrophages and atherosclerotic apolipoprotein E (apoE)−/− mice. Plasma level of sTLT1 was found to be significantly (P<0.05) higher in clinical (2342 ± 184 pg/ml) and subclinical cases (1773 ± 118 pg/ml) than healthy controls (461 ± 57 pg/ml). Moreover, statistical analyses further indicated that sTLT1 was not only associated with common risk factors for Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) in both clinical and subclinical groups but also strongly correlated with disease severity. Ex vivo studies on macrophages showed that sTLT1 interacts with Fcɣ receptor I (FcɣRI) to activate spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK)-mediated downstream MAP kinase signalling cascade to activate nuclear factor-κ B (NF-kB). Activation of NF-kB induces secretion of tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) from macrophage cells that plays pivotal role in governing the persistence of chronic inflammation. Atherosclerotic apoE−/− mice also showed high levels of sTLT1 and TNF-α in nearly occluded aortic stage indicating the contribution of sTLT1 in inflammation. Our results clearly demonstrate that sTLT1 is clinically related to the risk factors of CAD. We also showed that binding of sTLT1 with macrophage membrane receptor, FcɣR1 initiates inflammatory signals in macrophages suggesting its critical role in thrombus development and atherosclerosis.

Combining Values

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4, 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Proximal Phalanx ◽  
Common Error ◽  
The Third ◽  
Whole Person ◽  
Impairment Ratings ◽  
Upper Extremity Impairment ◽  
The Individual

Abstract To account for the effects of multiple impairments, evaluating physicians must provide a summary value that combines multiple impairments so the whole person impairment is equal to or less than the sum of all the individual impairment values. A common error is to add values that should be combined and typically results in an inflated rating. The Combined Values Chart in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, includes instructions that guide physicians about combining impairment ratings. For example, impairment values within a region generally are combined and converted to a whole person permanent impairment before combination with the results from other regions (exceptions include certain impairments of the spine and extremities). When they combine three or more values, physicians should select and combine the two lowest values; this value is combined with the third value to yield the total value. Upper extremity impairment ratings are combined based on the principle that a second and each succeeding impairment applies not to the whole unit (eg, whole finger) but only to the part that remains (eg, proximal phalanx). Physicians who combine lower extremity impairments usually use only one evaluation method, but, if more than one method is used, the physician should use the Combined Values Chart.

Impairment Tutorial: Functionally Limiting Upper Extremity Pain: Controversies in Impairment Rating

2003 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 4-12
Author(s):  
Lorne Direnfeld ◽  
James Talmage ◽  
Christopher Brigham
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Illness Behavior ◽  
Orthopedic Surgeon ◽  
First Case ◽  
Clinical Presentations ◽  
Whole Person ◽  
Physical Examinations ◽  
Upper Extremity Impairment ◽  
The Individual

Abstract This article was prompted by the submission of two challenging cases that exemplify the decision processes involved in using the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides). In both cases, the physical examinations were normal with no evidence of illness behavior, but, based on their histories and clinical presentations, the patients reported credible symptoms attributable to specific significant injuries. The dilemma for evaluators was whether to adhere to the AMA Guides, as written, or to attempt to rate impairment in these rare cases. In the first case, the evaluating neurologist used alternative approaches to define impairment based on the presence of thoracic outlet syndrome and upper extremity pain, as if there were a nerve injury. An orthopedic surgeon who evaluated the case did not base impairment on pain and used the upper extremity chapters in the AMA Guides. The impairment ratings determined using either the nervous system or upper extremity chapters of the AMA Guides resulted in almost the same rating (9% vs 8% upper extremity impairment), and either value converted to 5% whole person permanent impairment. In the second case, the neurologist evaluated the individual for neuropathic pain (9% WPI), and the orthopedic surgeon rated the patient as Diagnosis-related estimates Cervical Category II for nonverifiable radicular pain (5% to 8% WPI).

Spinal Impairment Evaluation: Fifth Edition Changes

2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert H. Haralson
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Standard Terminology ◽  
Made In

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, was published in November 2000 and contains major changes from its predecessor. In the Fourth Edition, all musculoskeletal evaluation and rating was described in a single chapter. In the Fifth Edition, this information has been divided into three separate chapters: Upper Extremity (13), Lower Extremity (14), and Spine (15). This article discusses changes in the spine chapter. The Models for rating spinal impairment now are called Methods. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, has reverted to standard terminology for spinal regions in the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) Method, and both it and the Range of Motion (ROM) Method now reference cervical, thoracic, and lumbar. Also, the language requiring the use of the DRE, rather than the ROM Method has been strengthened. The biggest change in the DRE Method is that evaluation should include the treatment results. Unfortunately, the Fourth Edition's philosophy regarding when and how to rate impairment using the DRE Model led to a number of problems, including the same rating of all patients with radiculopathy despite some true differences in outcomes. The term differentiator was abandoned and replaced with clinical findings. Significant changes were made in evaluation of patients with spinal cord injuries, and evaluators should become familiar with these and other changes in the Fifth Edition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document