Donor cause of death has been suggested to have a significant impact on cardiac transplant morbidity and mortality. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of donor spontaneous intracranial bleeding on clinical outcome after heart transplantation. A group of 160 recipients underwent cardiac transplantation from donors with spontaneous intracranial bleeding (ICB group). These were compared with 197 recipients who were transplanted from trauma donors (Trauma group). A higher 4-year mortality rate was noted in the ICB group (24% vs. 14%, p = = 0.015). ICB as a cause of donor death was an independent predictor of recipient mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.02, 95% CI 1.27-3.40, p < 0.0001). Compared with the Trauma group, the ICB group had an increased incidence of post-transplant graft dysfunction during the first week of transplant (10% vs. 3%, p = = 0.007), and higher incidence of interstitial myocardial fibrosis on their endomyocardial biopsies within 4 weeks of transplant (21% vs. 9%, p = = 0.0012). There was a trend towards an increased rate of allograft vasculopathy in the ICB group (competing risks adjusted hazard ratio 1.39, 95% CI 0.90-2.13, p = = 0.14).

Lymphangiomatosis of the bone is rare. The axial as well as appendicular skeleton may be affected. Neurosurgical consultation may be called for several reasons: (1) lesions involving the calvarium and/or spine; (2) nondiagnostic biopsies from more accessible and less morbid locations, and (3) persistent CSF leak and/or recurrent meningitis. Thus, it is important for the neurosurgeon to be familiar with this disease entity and consider it in the differential diagnoses of multifocal lytic lesions of the axial skeleton. We present a case report of a 4-year-old girl with lymphangiomatosis of the skull base and upper cervical spine with concurrent Chiari I malformation and briefly review the literature.

No abstract

Article 18.5 and Art. 18.6 of the present International Code of Botanical Nomenclature authorise the use of alternative names in the following eight cases of families of flowering plants: Compositae/Asteraceae, Cruciferae/Brassicaceae, Gramineae/Poaceae, Guttiferae/Clusiaceae, Labiatae/Lamiaceae, Leguminosae/Fabaceae, Palmae/Arecaceae, and Umbelliferae/Apiaceae. The first name in each of these pairs is not based on the name of an included genus, and permission to use these names under the Code has become increasingly controversial in recent years. Our present note looks briefly at the history of the alternative usages and then aims to indicate the extent to which the two alternatives are used in the literature today, laying a basis for any potential discussion of future action. A strong case is noted for maintaining Leguminosae rather than Fabaceae when this family is treated in a broad sense.

No abstract