MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed and Scopus electronic databases to identify eligible reports on cognitive changes following PT of PBT according to PRISMA guidelines. Reports were extracted for information on demographics and cognitive outcomes. Then, they were systematically reviewed based on three themes: (1) comparison with photon therapy, (2) comparison with baseline cognitive measures, to population normative mean or radiotherapy-naïve PBT patients and (3) effects of dose distribution to cognition.
RESULTS: Thirteen reports (median size (range): 70 (12-144)) were included. Four reports compared the cognitive outcome between PBT patients treated with proton to photon therapy and nine compared with baseline/normative mean/radiotherapy naïve from which two reported the effects of dose distribution. Reports found significantly poorer cognitive outcome among patients treated with photon therapy compared with proton therapy especially in general cognition and working memory. Craniospinal irradiation (CSI) was consistently associated with poorer cognitive outcome while focal therapy was associated with minor cognitive change/difference. In limited reports available, higher doses to the hippocampus and temporal lobes were implicated to larger cognitive change.
CONCLUSION: Available evidence suggests that PT causes less cognitive deficits compared with photon therapy. Children who underwent focal therapy with proton were consistently shown to have low risk of cognitive deficit suggesting the need for future studies to separate them from CSI. Evidence on the effect of dose distribution to cognition in PT is yet to mature.
METHODS: All relevant studies were identified through keyword searches in electronic databases from inception until September 2020. The searched publications were reviewed, categorised and analysed based on their respective methodology.
RESULTS: Hundred and one publications were identified which utilised existing MC-based applications/programs or customised MC simulations. Two outstanding challenges were identified that contribute to uncertainties in the virtual simulation reconstruction. The first challenge involves the use of anatomical models to represent individuals. Currently, phantom libraries best balance the needs of clinical practicality with those of specificity. However, mismatches of anatomical variations including body size and organ shape can create significant discrepancies in dose estimations. The second challenge is that the exact positioning of the patient relative to the beam is generally unknown. Most dose prediction models assume the patient is located centrally on the examination couch, which can lead to significant errors.
CONCLUSION: The continuing rise of computing power suggests a near future where MC methods become practical for routine clinical dosimetry. Dynamic, deformable phantoms help to improve patient specificity, but at present are only limited to adjustment of gross body volume. Dynamic internal organ displacement or reshaping is likely the next logical frontier. Image-based alignment is probably the most promising solution to enable this, but it must be automated to be clinically practical.
METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis to identify relevant randomized controlled trials involving infrapatellar fat pad resection and infrapatellar fat pad preservation during total knee arthroplasty in electronic databases, including Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Library, Highwire, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang database, up to March 2020.
RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials, involving 783 TKAs (722 patients), were included in the systematic review. Outcome measures included patellar tendon length (PTL), Insall-Salvati ratio (ISR), rate of anterior knee pain, Knee Society Scores (KSS), and knee range of motion. The meta-analysis identified a trend toward the shortening of the patellar tendon with IPFP resection at 6 months (P = 0.0001) and 1 year (P = 0.001). We found no statistical difference in ISR (P = 0.87), rate of anterior knee pain within 6 months (p = 0.45) and 1 year (p = 0.38), KSS at 1 year (p = 0.77), and knee range of motion within 6 months (p = 0.61) and 1 year (0.46).
CONCLUSION: Based on the available level I evidence, we were unable to conclude that one surgical technique of IPFP can definitively be considered superior over the other. More adequately powered and better-designed randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies with long-term follow-up are required to produce evidence-based guidelines regarding IPFP resection.
Objectives: The main aim of this fundamental investigation is to examine the influence of a two-phase hybrid nanofluid approach on mixed convection characteristics including the consequences of varying Richardson number, number of oscillations, nanoparticle volume fraction, and dimensionless length and dimensionless position of the solid obstacle.
Methods: The migration of composite hybrid nanoparticles due to the nano-scale forces of the Brownian motion and thermophoresis was taken into account. There is an inner block near the middle of the enclosure, which contributes toward the flow, heat, and mass transfer. The top lid cover wall of the enclosure is allowed to move which induces a mixed convection flow. The impact of the migration of hybrid nanoparticles with regard to heat transfer is also conveyed in the conservation of energy. The governing equations are molded into the non-dimensional pattern and then explained using the finite element technique. The effect of various non-dimensional parameters such as the volume fraction of nanoparticles, the wave number of walls, and the Richardson number on the heat transfer and the concentration distribution of nanoparticles are examined. Various case studies for Al2O3-Cu/water hybrid nanofluids are performed.
Results: The results reveal that the temperature gradient could induce a notable concentration variation in the enclosure.
Conclusion: The location of the solid block and undulation of surfaces are valuable in the control of the heat transfer and the concentration distribution of the composite nanoparticles.