PubMed · 11878331
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
M Halperin. 2001. Post-mortem sperm retrieval.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11878331/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of a polymethylmethacrylate contact lens as an artificial cornea to enhance visualization for practice surgery using cadaver eyes. DESIGN: The opaque cornea of a cadaver eye is removed by trephination. Cyanoacrylate glue is used to secure a large-diameter polymethylmethacrylate contact lens to the corneal rim. RESULTS: Excellent visualization for practice surgery is achieved with this technique. The adhesion of the contact lens to the cadaver eye maintains the anterior chamber sufficiently to perform phacoemulsification cataract extraction or pars plana vitrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: This technique improves visualization of the intraocular structures during practice surgery, thereby enhancing the ability of the learning surgeon to perform and practice delicate surgical maneuvers. The procedure is simple, effective, and inexpensive.
Intraosseous infusion is a technique used for the administration of fluids to a hemodynamically shocked child in whom attempts to access the vascular system have been unsuccessful. Although few complications are seen, injury to the epiphyseal growth plate during the performance of this technique remains a serious problem. This study investigates the relationship between the site of insertion of the intraosseous needle and the epiphyseal growth plate, and the ease of needle insertion into various locations of the tibia in newborn infants. Fourteen newborn infant cadavers (28 tibias in total) were dissected after placement of four needles: 1). through the tibial tuberosity (Site A); 2). 10 mm distal to the tibial tuberosity (Site B); 3). 20 mm distal to the tibial tuberosity (Site C) and; 4). 10 mm proximal to the tibial tuberosity (Site D). Distances from the distal end of the epiphyseal growth plate were measured. A high number of needle placements at Site A were inserted into the epiphyseal growth plate. Most placements at Site B were between 10 and 16 mm from the epiphyseal growth plate on the right side and between 10 and 15 mm on the left side, and all were inserted without difficulty. Although far from the epiphyseal growth plate, most placements at Site C were very difficult to insert because of the thick cortical bone. All placements at Site D entered the epiphysis or the epiphysis and joint space of the knee. An insertion site of at least 10 mm distal to the tibial tuberosity is therefore recommended to avoid epiphyseal growth plate injury and ensure ease of insertion.
A new technique for the measurement of subsidence of the femoral components is proposed. The method relies on the implantation of two ball markers around the femoral stem. A single radiographic image of the hip is analysed using image-processing techniques to minimize subjectivity related to manual identification of landmarks. Dimensions of the stem are used to correct for magnification and out-of-plane rotations resulting from radiographic positioning. This technique has been applied to a specific design of implant (Exeter). A study of the effect of radiographic positioning has been conducted using a cadaveric bone phantom. Results for the variation in the measurement of axial migration compared to the neutral position (in millimetres) were: 0.942 (10 degrees extension); 0.347 (20 degrees flexion); -0.435 (40 degrees internal rotation); 0.187 (30 degrees external rotation) for distances measured between the bone marker and the implant. Results for distances measured between the implant and the cement centralizer were: 0.107 (10 degrees extension); -0.277 (20 degrees flexion); 0.085 (40 degrees internal rotation); 0.280 (30 degrees external rotation). The variations from within a more realistic range of positions demonstrate that axial migration measurements of ca. 0.5 mm between the bone and implant, and less than 0.3 mm between the implant and the bone cement, may be expected.