Search

This work presents an improved method for the measurement of the rolling bearing torque loss using a modified Four‐Ball machine. The new assembly allowed precise and accurate rolling bearing torque loss, while operating at constant temperature, controlled by means of liquid cooling‐heating system in which a thermal fluid is carried through the centre of the driving shaft. Several rolling bearing test campaigns are performed, using a fully formulated ISO VG 150 poly‐α‐olefin gear oil. The frictional torque loss is measured and compared with models available and the surface roughness of the rolling bearing races is observed using an optical profilometer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Giant cavernous carotid aneurysms (GCCAs) usually exert substantial mass effect on adjacent intracavernous cranial nerves. Since predictors of cranial nerve deficits (CNDs) in patients with GCCA are unknown, we designed a study to identify associations between CND and GCCA morphology and the location of mass effect.Methods: This study was based on data from the prospective clinical and imaging databases of the Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Registry. We used magnetic resonance imaging and digital subtraction angiography to examine GCCA volume, presence of partial thrombosis (PT), GCCA origins, and the location of mass effect. We also documented whether CND was present.Results: We included 36 GCCA in 34 patients, which had been entered into the registry by eight participating centers between January 2009 and March 2016. The prevalence of CND was 69.4%, with one CND in 41.7% and more than one in 27.5%. The prevalence of PT was 33.3%. The aneurysm origin was most frequently located at the anterior genu (52.8%). The prevalence of CND did not differ between aneurysm origins (p = 0.29). Intracavernous mass effect was lateral in 58.3%, mixed medial/lateral in 27.8%, and purely medial in 13.9%. CND occurred significantly more often in GCCA with lateral (81.0%) or mixed medial/lateral (70.0%) mass effect than in GCCA with medial mass effect (20.0%; p = 0.03). After adjusting our data for the effects of the location of mass effect, we found no association between the prevalence of CND and aneurysm volume (odds ratio (OR) 1.30 (0.98-1.71); p = 0.07), the occurrence of PT (OR 0.64 (0.07-5.73); p = 0.69), or patient age (OR 1.02 (95% CI 0.95-1.09); p = 0.59).Conclusions: Distinguishing between medial versus lateral location of mass effect may be more helpful than measuring aneurysm volumes or examining aneurysm thrombosis in understanding why some patients with GCCA present with CND while others do not.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02066493 (clinicaltrials.gov) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pain and sensory disturbance in the distribution of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve in the ventrolateral portion of the thigh is called meralgia paresthetica (MP). The incidence of MP has risen along with the increasing prevalence of obesity and diabetes mellitus and was recently estimated at 32 new cases per 100 000 persons per year. In this review, we provide an overview of current standards and developments in the diagnosis and treatment of MP. Methods: This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective literature search, with special attention to meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized and controlled trials (RCTs), and prospective observational studies. Results: The diagnosis is mainly based on typical symptoms combined with a positive response to an infiltration procedure. In atypical cases, electrophysiological testing, neurosonography, and magnetic resonance imaging can be helpful in establishing the diagnosis. The literature search did not reveal any studies of high quality. Four prospective observational studies with small case numbers and partly inconsistent results are available. In a meta-analysis of 149 cases, pain relief was described after infiltration in 85% of cases and after surgery in 80%, with 1-38 months of follow-up. In another meta-analysis of 670 cases, there was pain relief after infiltration in 22% of cases, after surgical decompression in 63%, and after neurectomy in 85%. Hardly any data are available on more recent treatment options, such as radiofrequency therapy, spinal cord stimulation, or peripheral nerve stimulation. Conclusion: The state of the evidence is limited in both quantity and quality, corresponding to evidence level 2a for surgical and non-surgical methods. Advances in imaging and neurophysiological testing have made the diagnosis easier to establish. When intervention is needed, good success rates have been achieved with surgery (decompression, neurectomy), and variable success rates with infiltration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]