Study Design: Retrospective cohort study.Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of bisphosphonates and teriparatide in the management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with regard to pain management, prevention of nonunion, and radiological as well as clinical outcomes.Overview of Literature: Osteoporosis refers to a skeletal disorder characterized by decreased bone strength caused by poor bone density and quality causing fragility, resulting in long periods of pain-related immobilization.Methods: In a 24-month follow-up retrospective study, 191 patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures were randomly assigned to the bisphosphonate group (n=104) or the teriparatide group (n=87), with patients opting for their treatment between January 2016 and October 2020. Demographic data and patient-reported outcomes scores, including the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), union rates, and kyphosis progression, were assessed at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after treatment.Results: Both groups had a significant decrease in VAS, from 8.38±0.74 to 3.15±1.40 in the bisphosphonate group and from 8.49±0.73 to 1.11±0.31 in the teriparatide group. The ODI scores reduced significantly at 2-year follow-ups, recording 25.02±13.94 and 15.11±2.17 in the bisphosphonate and teriparatide groups, respectively. Risks of nonunion development were slightly higher at 11.53% in the bisphosphonate group and 8.63% in the teriparatide group required operative intervention. The kyphosis progression angles were also significantly lower in the teriparatide group (4.97°±0.78°) than in the bisphosphonate group (8.09°±1.25°).Conclusions: Over time, numerous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of bisphosphonates and teriparatide in ameliorating pain. In this study, the efficacy of teriparatide surpassed that of bisphosphonates in certain aspects, such as the initial 6-month union rates and reduction in the progression of segmental kyphosis. However, bisphosphonates and teriparatide yield similar and favorable union rates at 1 year and final follow-up.

Spinal cord tumors, though rare, present formidable challenges in clinical management due to their intricate nature. Traditional treatment modalities like surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy have been the mainstay for managing these tumors. However, despite significant advancements, challenges persist, including the limitations of surgical resection and the potential side effects associated with radiation therapy. In response to these limitations, a wave of innovative approaches is reshaping the treatment landscape for spinal cord tumors. Advancements in gene therapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy are offering groundbreaking possibilities. Gene therapy holds the potential to modify the genes responsible for tumor growth, while immunotherapy harnesses the body’s own immune system to fight cancer cells. Targeted therapy aims to strike a specific vulnerability within the tumor cells, offering a more precise and potentially less toxic approach. Additionally, novel surgical adjuncts are being explored to improve visualization and minimize damage to surrounding healthy tissue during tumor removal. These developments pave the way for a future of personalized medicine for spinal cord tumors. By delving deeper into the molecular makeup of individual tumors, doctors can tailor treatment strategies to target specific mutations and vulnerabilities. This personalized approach offers the potential for more effective interventions with fewer side effects, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes and a better quality of life. This evolving landscape of spinal cord tumor management signifies the crucial integration of established and innovative strategies to create a brighter future for patients battling this complex condition.

Introduction: Proximal femoral fractures of trochanteric region are common orthopaedic trauma in routine practice and the ideal implant for treatment is still not found. After the sliding hip screw and various intramedullary nails having been used for so long, newer implants like PFNA II (Asian version of PFNA) with helical blade are now available. But ideal position of helical blade in femoral head has been in debate till date. For sliding hip screw, concept of maintaining Tip Apex Distance (TAD) less than 25mm is well accepted. So, the purpose of this study is to determine the optimal TAD for PFNA II in trochanteric femoral fractures. Materials and methods:100 cases of proximal femoral fractures of trochanteric region which were treated with PFNA II between August 2015 to July 2019 at Geetanjali Medical College and hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India were included in this study. TAD value and position of helical blade tip in femoral head was correlated with failure of fixation. 60 cases were studied retrospectively and 40 cases prospectively. Results: The mean TAD found in this study was 17.97 mm. The overall fixation failure in this study was 3 out of 100 cases (3%). TAD of more than 25 mm was seen in 7 cases out of which 1 case failed (14.28%). However, only 2 out of 93 cases (2.15%) failed in cases with TAD less than 25 mm. Position of helical blade tip in failed cases was superior-centre in 2 cases, while centre-posterior in 1 case. However, all 60 cases with centre-centre position healed successfully. Failed cases showed implant breakage in 2 cases and fracture collapse in 1 case. Conclusion: This study recommends that maintaining TAD less than 25 mm prevents fixation failure in treating trochanteric femoral fractures with PFNA II. Central position of helical blade tip shows most successful result. Also, helical blade of PFNA II provides better hold in osteoporotic bones. Keywords: trochanteric fractures, TAD (Tip Apex Distance), PFNA II, helical blade

Background: To undertake a study which outlines the clinical and radiological features of ossification of yellow ligament (OYL) causing thoracic myelopathy (TM) in Indian subcontinent, to assess the outcomes of surgical resection of yellow ligament and compare different preoperative factors that contribute to be a risk factor in the overall post-surgical recovery rates (RR). Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a cohort of 45 patients who visited our spine OPD from January 2012 to December 2019 who underwent surgical decompression for TM due to OYL was studied. The surgical outcomes and RR were calculated, compared and pre operative risk factors which could possibly be involved in giving poorer RR were analysed. Results: Our study included 45 patients who underwent surgical resection of OYL for TM. On comparison of post operative improvement in myelopathic symptoms, pre-operative mJOA score of 4.56 had increased significantly to 7.83 at 2 years follow up. While the majority (80%) of patients had an excellent and good recovery rate while 16% of patients had a fair recovery rate and 4% had no change at all in comparison to pre-operative mJOA scores. Preoperative risk factors for poor outcomes were also analysed. Conclusions: Early and timely before the onset or progression of any neurologic involvement. The pre operative risk factors which could give guarded prognosis and lower RR are, the presence of intramedullary signal changes (myelomalacia), >6-10 months of progressive pre operative symptoms and an mJOA<5.

A 58‐day‐old female infant reported with complaints of fever, difficult breathing, loose stool, vomiting and refusal to feed for 4 days. Laboratory work showed anaemia, leucocytosis with elevated neutrophils and thrombocytopenia along with high C‐reactive protein and D‐dimer with bilateral patchy infiltrate on X‐ray and positivity for COVID‐19. Her blood culture was also positive for Gram‐negative bacilli (acinetobacter lwoffii). Along with antibiotics, she was given 50 ml convalescent plasma. She was off oxygen within 2 days and showed improvement in lung lesions, and RT‐PCR was negative by day 7 and discharged by day 10 of transfusion.

Spinal cord tumors, though rare, present formidable challenges in clinical management due to their intricate nature. Traditional treatment modalities like surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy have been the mainstay for managing these tumors. However, despite significant advancements, challenges persist, including the limitations of surgical resection and the potential side effects associated with radiation therapy. In response to these limitations, a wave of innovative approaches is reshaping the treatment landscape for spinal cord tumors. Advancements in gene therapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy are offering groundbreaking possibilities. Gene therapy holds the potential to modify the genes responsible for tumor growth, while immunotherapy harnesses the body's own immune system to fight cancer cells. Targeted therapy aims to strike a specific vulnerability within the tumor cells, offering a more precise and potentially less toxic approach. Additionally, novel surgical adjuncts are being explored to improve visualization and minimize damage to surrounding healthy tissue during tumor removal. These developments pave the way for a future of personalized medicine for spinal cord tumors. By delving deeper into the molecular makeup of individual tumors, doctors can tailor treatment strategies to target specific mutations and vulnerabilities. This personalized approach offers the potential for more effective interventions with fewer side effects, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes and a better quality of life. This evolving landscape of spinal cord tumor management signifies the crucial integration of established and innovative strategies to create a brighter future for patients battling this complex condition.