Posted on 11/06/2004 11:56:52 AM PST by jalisco555
A new study undermines the long-held belief among obstetricians that oxygen deprivation, or hypoxia, is the main cause of cerebral palsy in premature infants.
The study, published in the October issue of The American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, found that the brain injury that leads to cerebral palsy was much more commonly associated with infection than with hypoxia.
The new findings, said Dr. Ernest Graham, an assistant professor in the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Johns Hopkins and the lead author of the study, have important implications for both research and clinical practice.
"This changes our thinking," Dr. Graham said. "In the past, we've focused primarily on hypoxia," but the study suggests that monitoring for hypoxia "isn't likely to help very much."
Finding ways to prevent and treat infections, on the other hand, "may have a huge impact on the problem," he said.
The researchers studied premature infants born from 1994 to 2001 in a university hospital. They looked at cases of periventricular leukomalacia, or PVL, a specific kind of damage to the white matter of the brain. The white matter transmits signals in the brain and from the brain to the spinal cord, and is particularly subject to injury in premature infants.
While there are other factors associated with brain damage in premature infants, like bleeding into the brain and pregnancies in which a woman carries two or more fetuses, a large majority of infants with PVL develop cerebral palsy. The symptoms may not be evident for many months after birth, but the damage can be seen on brain scans, which reveal the characteristic cysts that form after brain tissue is damaged.
In time, the cysts are reabsorbed, leaving abnormally enlarged ventricles where the brain tissue has died. PVL can cause a range of physical and mental disabilities from mild to very severe, but the most common is spastic diplegia, tightly contracted muscles in the legs that cannot function normally.
When researchers looked at 150 preterm babies with PVL and matched them to a control group of 150 preemies born in the same time period who did not have brain damage, the results were surprising. Hypoxia, as measured by umbilical cord blood tests, was no more common in the premature babies with PVL than it was in the other babies.
Delivery by Caesarean section was not associated with PVL, nor did tests of blood chemistry distinguish injured from noninjured babies. Even babies whose fetal heart rates were reduced during labor and delivery were not any more likely than other babies to suffer brain injury.
What did make a difference, and it was a large one, was whether the babies had suffered infections. Infants who had positive bacterial cultures of the blood, cerebrospinal fluid or throat were two to four times as likely to suffer brain damage as those who did not. Staphylococcus infections predominated, but the researchers found more than 10 other kinds of infections as well, and the type of infection made no difference in the rates of injury.
"This is an important and fascinating paper," said Dr. Larry Gilstrap, chairman of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of Texas Medical School at Houston. Dr. Gilstrap, who was not involved in the study, noted that with a possible cause for the brain injuries, methods of preventing them might be found.
I smell REFUND!!!
Really?
No, not really.
"Does anyone here think he will have the grace to apologize to his victims?"
Last I heard he was promising to keep up the rage, so I wouldn't hold my breath. Well, I'm sorry for his wife, she's the one who needs a doctor now.
Time for the doctors to sue EdWeirds and collect back money.
Maybe they can sue dumb jurors and left wing judges for allowing this legal abortion to happen.
This sentence is inaccurate. For a long time many obstetricians have questioned whether there is a link between hypoxia and cerebral palsy. This scientific doubt never stopped Edwards and his parasitic brethren from extorting millions from the health care system and ruining the careers of fine doctors. This reptiles's disreputable past is one of the many stories the MSM neglected to report.
hmmmmmmm wonders if all those doctors can now turn around and sue Edwards? wouldnt that be nice.
In the first place, I thought hypoxia as a cause was controversial, not a "long held belief." In the second place, since when has science ever mattered to the plaintiff's bar? The evidence on silicon implants was overwhelming, and that didn't stop an overall settlement in the billions.
One of the big disappointments in the Bush campaign was the absolute pass they gave Edwards on this issue.
It is crystal clear that he used junk science to bilk millions from innocent doctors and hospitals while causing the number of c-section births to increase dramatically.
Edwards has the morality of a New Jersey mafia construction-site boss.
The Main Stream Media gave him a pass on all this. Which is no suprise.
But so did the GOP. Which was a heartbreaking disappointment.
We won. That's great. But we left a lot of important things unsaid. And that's not great.
Next up : unhappiness is caused by incompetent doctors at birth.
A clever lawyer with a convincing rent-an-expert can work wonders with a gullible jury, despite the abscence of scientific evidence. I sure hope Bush tackles the issue of tort reform in a meaningful way.
Give W a chance. I think he didn't want to have to waste airtime on whether Edwards is guilty of junk science. That would have played into Edwards' hands. After all, Edwards has plenty of experience misleading the public on this issue.
OTOH, the trial lawyers are now clearly in Bush's (metaphorical) gunsites.
Plaintiff Attorney: "The first thing my client saw when he emerged into this world was a fat, ugly obstetrician. He's never been able to adjust as a result."
Oh, I almost forgot, malpractice reform is a sham, according to lawyers on FreeRepublic.
Ping
C'mon. You think Edwards is a good persuader? You think he would have turned charges against himself back on his accusers in some clever or adroit way?
He might be good in a courtroom (though how that is doesn't come across the tv screen, at least not to me), but he's definitely not good in a campaign. Look how the press ignored him. Look how the Kerry people low-profiled him.
No, I think Rove took a calculated risk to let those two leftist scumbags off the hook on 95% of their scurrilous (and in Kerry's case, criminal) behavior on the risky proposition that "he who campaigns nicest campaigns best".
We had a great victory, and I'm extremely grateful for it, but I don't think it hurts to ask questions about methodology and campaign tactics.
I am of the opinion that by "playing it safe" Rove not only unnecessarily risked allowing those two leftist scumbags to win the election but that he also forfeited a landslide.
If the GOP had aggressively outed those two losers, Bush would have gotten 55-60% of the vote.
Respectfully, I beg to differ. It would now seem that they were being sued for missing the presence of infection during pregnancy. Medicine has overconfidently dismissed many infectious causes of conditions to their own peril. While I do not condone the practices of attorneys like Edwards, I don't condone the casual attitude of many medical professionals as well. In short, the Dr. Edward Jenners', of smallpox fame, are not to be seen at your local medical center.
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.