PURPOSE: The proposed the thoracolumbar injury classification system (TLICS) for thoracolumbar injury cites the integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex (PLC). However, no report has elucidated the severity of damage in thoracic and lumbar injury with classification schemes by presence of the PLC injury. The purpose of this study was to accurately assess the severity of damage in thoracic and lumbar burst fractures with the PLC injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients treated surgically for thoracic and lumbar burst fractures were enrolled in this study. There were 71 men and 29 women whose mean age was 36 years. Clinical and radiologic data were investigated, and the thoracolumbar injury classification schemes were also evaluated. All patients were divided into two groups (the P group with PLC injuries and the C group without PLC injuries) for comparative examination. RESULTS: Fourth-one of 100 cases showed PLC injuries in MRI study. The load sharing classification score was significantly higher in the P group [7.8+/-0.2 points for the P group and 6.9+/-1.1 points for the C group (p<0.001)]. The TLICS (excluded PLC score) score was also significantly higher in the P group [6.2+/-1.1 points for the P group and 4.0+/-1.4 points for the C group (p<0.001)]. CONCLUSION: The presence of PLC injury significantly influenced the severity of damage. In management of thoracic lumbar burst fractures, evaluation of PLC injury is important to accurately assess the severity of damage.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Female ; Humans ; Ligaments, Articular/*injuries ; Lumbar Vertebrae/*injuries ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Spinal Fractures/*classification/*physiopathology/surgery ; Thoracic Vertebrae/*injuries ; Young Adult

Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy between original drugs and generic products.  Candidate drugs included two types of hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, simvastatin and pravastatin, because of their importance at reducing the health expenditure for hyperlipidemia.
Design: We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy (total cholesterol, triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein and high-density lipoprotein levels), safety (biochemical parameters), and medication adherence based on patient data.  We set the follow-up period at 6 months before and after substitution.  Data were analyzed by paired-sample t-tests (statistical significance level of 0.05).
Methods: The subjects included in this study were ambulatory patients visiting Nakajima Hospital for dyslipidemia treatment.  Selected patients included those taking both the original drug and the generic product; i.e., patients who had substituted the original drug Lipovas® for the generic product Simvastatin OHARA, or those who had substituted the original drug Mevalotin® for the generic drug Pravatin®.
Results: A total of 118 patients in the simvastatin study and 43 patients in the pravastatin study were candidates for the present study.  We found that there were no significant differences before and after substitution.  Even though there were differences in some of the biochemical parameters, the range remained within normal levels.  With regard to medication adherence, we found no significant differences.
Conclusion: In this study, we found no significant differences before and after substituting medications with generic drugs.  Additionally, we found no subjective symptom changes after substitution.  To develop clinical information on generic products and to store such information, it is important that pharmaceutical products be used appropriately.