To observe normal bone marrow stromal function for supporting hematopoiesis and realize the correlation of bone marrow stromal function in patients with aplastic anemia (AA) and anisodamine therapy, normal human marrow CFU-GM was assayed on bone marrow stromal layer (SL) formed on week 3 culture, and the CFU-GM without SL as a control (100%). Results showed that the production of CFU-GM on the normal SL was significantly higher than that of the control. The production of CFU-GM on the SL of 4 AA patients, who responded to anisodamine, was < 80% of the control, and when 2 of them were reexamined for stromal function after treatment, the number of CFU-GM on SL rose up to 168.8% and 249.2% from 38.7% and 39.7% of the control respectively. While in the rest 6 patients, the number of CFU-GM was > 80% of the control, only one patient was improved by anisodamine therapy. So, normal bone marrow stromal layer can obviously support the growth of granulocyte/macrophage progenitor cells. Anisodamine therapy could be an effective agents for aplastic anemia with stromal dysfunction
Adolescent ; Adult ; Anemia, Aplastic ; drug therapy ; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal ; therapeutic use ; Bone Marrow Cells ; cytology ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Solanaceous Alkaloids ; therapeutic use ; Statistics as Topic ; Stromal Cells ; physiology

OBJECTIVETo study the benefit of prophylactic antibiotics (PA) in totally percutaneous aortic endovascular repair (PEVAR) in the catheterization laboratory for reducing stent-graft infection and postimplantation syndrome (PIS).

METHODSThe clinical data were analyzed of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repairs. The patients were divided into non-PA group and PA group according to the use of prophylactic antibiotics before PEVAR. The diagnosis of infection was made by two senior physicians with reference to Hospital Acquired Infection Diagnostic Criteria Assessment released by the Ministry of Health of China.

RESULTSThe 95 enrolled patients included 35 with PA and 60 without PA group, who were comparable for baseline characteristics. Infection-related deaths occurred in 1 case in non-PA group and retrograde Stanford type A dissection and death occurred in 1 case in PA group (1.67% vs 2.85%, P=1.00). The PA and non-PA groups showed no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative infection (5% vs 2.86%, P=1.000), hospital stay (9.30±7.21 vs 10.06±5.69, P=0.094), infection-related mortality (1.67% vs 0%, P=1.00), or postoperative fever (70.90% vs 91.43%, P=0.20). The body temperature showed significant variations at different time points after procedure (F=19.831, P<0.001) irrelevant to the use of prophylactic antibiotics (F=0.978, P=0.326).

CONCLUSIONThe current data do not support the benefit of PA in reducing postoperative infection and PIS in patients undergoing PEVAR, but the patients without PA may have worse clinical outcomes in the event of postoperative infections.

Anti-Bacterial Agents ; administration & dosage ; Antibiotic Prophylaxis ; Aorta, Thoracic ; surgery ; China ; Endovascular Procedures ; Humans ; Length of Stay ; Postoperative Complications ; prevention & control ; Stents ; Vascular Surgical Procedures