49% and 1.81, respectively, for the Axiom Artis and 91.00% and 2.26 for the Fluorospot TOP. The stent detection rates over all modes for the SMART and Luminexx stents were better using the Axiom Artis machine (97.61% vs 93.55%
and 98.28% vs 90.41%, respectively) and those for the Sinus-SuperFlex and Zilver stents were better using the Fluorospot TOP machine (90.83% vs 83.56% and 89.29% vs 80.50%). The subjective radiopacity scores of stent visibility were worse for the Axiom Artis than the Fluorospot TOP for all stents except the Luminexx stent (mean score, 2.34 vs 2.21, respectively). The objective stent detection rates and subjective radiopacity scores improved using the spotfilm mode and with raising amplification, whereas increases in the fluoroscopy pulsing frequency did not improve stent detection rates or radiopacity Screening Library scores for either machine. The radiation doses at continuous fluoroscopy were approximately 90% higher for the Axiom Artis than for the Fluorospot
TOP (2.60 vs 1.41 mu ML323 cost Gy/m(2) at 30 pulses/s, respectively).\n\nCONCLUSION. The objective correct stent detection rates were similar for both machines with differences in detection for the respective stents. The subjective radiopacity scores were almost always better for the Fluorospot TOP machine. Also, the Axiom Artis machine generated approximately 90% higher radiation doses in fluoroscopy. For both machines, using a higher fluoroscopy pulsing frequency had no positive effect on objective correct stent detection rates or subjective radiopacity scores.”
“Peripheral nerve injury in humans often leads to incomplete functional recovery. In this review we discuss the potential for gene therapy to be used as a strategy alongside surgical repair techniques for the study of peripheral nerve regeneration in rodent models and with a view to its eventual use for the promotion of successful regeneration in the clinic. Gene therapy can be defined as the introduction of a foreign, therapeutic gene into living cells in order to treat a disease. The first attempts to express a foreign gene in peripheral neurons date back more than 25 years. The vectors used at that time were imperfect mainly because they contained viral genes
that were expressed in the VX-680 mouse target cells and elicited an immunological response. Fortunately significant progress has been made: today adeno-associated viral vectors can be produced completely free of viral genes and Phase I and II clinical studies have shown that these vectors are well tolerated. The technology for gene delivery has reached a state of readiness for clinical translation in many fields of neurology, including peripheral nerve repair. The current range of potential therapeutic genes for the repair of the traumatized peripheral nerve has also grown over the years and now includes neurotrophic factors with specificities for various subtypes of peripheral neurons, cell adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules and transcription factors.