Surgical Treatment Method of Isthmic Spondylolisthesis

Surgical Treatment Method of Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Comparison of Two and Three Vertebral Segment Posterolateral Fusion in the Treatment of Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Serkan BILGIC, Omer ERSEN, Tolga EGE, Kenan KOCA, Selahattin OZYUREK, Safak EKINCI, Erbil OGUZ, Ali SEHIRLIOGLU ABSTRACT Background Optimal surgical treatment method of isthmic spondylolisthesis remains unclear. Complications can be invited while saving a segment for lumbar motion. Objective The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the effect of the number of fusion levels on the clinical results of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis patients who had undergone posterior instrumentation and PLF. Patients and Methods This retrospective study comprised 37 (20 male, 17 female) patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis who had undergone posterior instrumentation and PLF (Postero-lateral fusion) between January 2005 and May 2011. Pre and post-operative radiological evaluation was made by anteroposterior, lateral, oblique and lateral flexion-extension x-rays. Preoperative spondylolisthesis slippage grading was evaluated according to the Meyerding classification from the preoperative radiographs. Results The mean age of the patients was 36.4 ± 9.2 years and the mean follow-up period was 34.3 months. Two-level fusion was applied to 22 patients and single-level fusion was applied to 15 patients. Decompression was performed on 7 patients in the two-level fusion group and on 6 patients in the single-level fusion group. There were no neurological complication after surgery in either group. No union complications were seen in the two-level PLF group but in the single-level PLF group, screw loosening occurred in 3 patients and screw breakage in 1 due to the pseudoarthrosis. These four patients were revised with two-level PLF. Conclusions This study has demonstrated that two-level posterior instrumentation and PLF with local bone grafts and DBM have significantly better clinical and radiological results than single-level surgery. To avoid potential complications of PLIF, two-level PLF can be an alternative treatment option. Key words:Istmic spondylolisthesis, Posterior lumbar interbody fusion, Fixation Background Lumbar spondylolisthesis is present in about 5% to 6% of the population with various etiopathogenesis. Due to its variant pathological anatomy, the radiological appearance, age and clinical aspect of the patients are different on diagnosis. It generally starts as spondylolysis, a bilateral pars fatigue fracture and becomes spondylolisthesis with a slip of a vertebra over the adjacent one. As the slip increases, disc degeneration and pain starts (1-3). Although conservative treatment is the first treatment option, surgery for symptomatic spondylolisthesis in adults has been found to have better clinical results than conservative treatment choices (3, 4). However, it remains unclear which surgical strategy should be adopted, as there is limited scientific evidence on which to base an optimal treatment method. Discussions on spondylolisthesis treatment have generally focussed on reduction, fusion levels, graft choices, and surgical techniques (5-7). One of the most preferred surgical treatment options for spondylolisthesis is posterior transpedicular instrumentation of the relevant segments and posterolateral fusion (PLF) (5, 7). However, it is still a matter of controversy in literature as to how many levels should be fused and instrumented. Objectives The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the effect of the number of fusion levels on the clinical results of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis patients who had undergone posterior instrumentation and PLF. Materials and Methods This retrospective study comprised 37 (20 male, 17 female) patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis who had undergone posterior instrumentation and PLF between January 2005 and May 2011. Patients with spondylolisthesis other than Type 2 according to the Wiltse classification were excluded from the study. Pre and post-operative radiological evaluation was made by anteroposterior, lateral, oblique and lateral flexion-extension x-rays. Preoperative spondylolisthesis slippage grading was evaluated according to the Meyerding classification from the preoperative radiographs. The decompression decision was made preoperatively according to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and patients preoperative neurological evaluation. Preoperative and postoperative neurological status, duration of surgery, number of fused and instrumented levels, total blood loss and complications were evaluated from the clinical database. For clinical evaluation of surgical outcomes, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) a nd Visual Analog Scale (VAS) applied at the final follow-up were used. 3.1 Surgical procedure: Exposure was obtained from the spinous processes to the transverse processes bilaterally throughout segments planned for fusion. Under fluoroscopic control, 6.5 mm pedicle screws were placed by free-hand technique. No reduction manoeuvre was used. Decompression of the segments, which had been determined by preoperative MRI and clinical examination was performed for the patients with neurological deficit. In all cases PLF was performed. In the area planned for fusion, the spinous processes were resected, peeled off from soft tissues and used for grafting with demineralized bone matrix. Patients were mobilized with a soft brace on the first postoperative day and the brace was continued for 3 months. (Figure 1, 2) 3.2 Statistical analysis We used the SPSS software package (version 15.0, SPSS, Chicago, IL) and expressed categorical variables as percentages and continuous variables as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (quartiles). Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to evaluate whether the distribution of continuous variables was normal. For parameters that showed normal distribution we used the paired sample t test and for parameters that did not show normal distribution the Mann-Whitney U-test was used. Chi-square test was used to analyze categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at p Results All patients had a history of at least 3 months of lumbar pain due to the spondylolisthesis, which had proved to be resistant to conservative treatment. The mean age of the patients was 36.4 ± 9.2 years and the mean follow-up period was 34.3 months. Low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis was present at L5-S1 level in 23 patients, at L4-5 level in 13 patients and at L3-4 level in 1 patient. Two-level fusion was applied to 22 patients and single-level fusion was applied to 15 patients. Decompression was performed on 7 patients in the two-level fusion group and on 6 patients in the single-level fusion group. There were no neurological complications after surgery in either group. Mean duration of surgery for single-level and two-level surgery was 160 minutes and 190 minutes (160-240), and average blood loss was 285 ml and 390 ml respectively. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of demographic properties (Table 1). One of the patients in the two-level PLF group had superficial infection and was treated with debridement and antibiotheraphy. No union complications were seen in the two-level PLF group but in the single-level PLF group, screw loosening occurred in 3 patients and screw breakage in 1 due to the pseudoarthrosis. These four patients were revised with two-level PLF. (Figure 3) ODI scores from the final follow-up were 12.2 ±6.2 in the single-level PLF group, and 9.2  ± 6.4 in the two-level PLF group (p=0,035). VAS scores were 3.2 ±1.7 in the single-level PLF group and 2.9 ±1.6 in the two-level PLF group (p=0.043). The ODI and VAS scores of the patients revised with two- level PLF were excluded from the clinical evaluation. Discussion Lumbar spondylolysthesis has several etiopathogenetic factors as was shown by Marchetti and Bartolozzi giving rise to variations in pathological anatomy, radiological findings, age and clinical symptoms of the patients on diagnosis. When conservative treatment options fail, surgery becomes the next step. Although there have been a large number of studies on spondylolisthesis, there is no clear evidence for a single superior treatment option. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and PLF with/without instrumentation are the most widely accepted surgical methods. Whilst PLF with instrumentation is the most preferred treatment for most authors, there is no scientific evidence showing that PLF is disadvantageous compared to PLIF or circumferential fusion (8-11) even though the major theoretical advantage of PLIF and circumferential fusion seems to have resulted in improved outcomes compared with PLF. Ekman et al (12) found that the type of fusi on, whether PLIF or PLF, did not affect the outcome of surgical treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis over a two year follow-up period. Furthermore, PLIF is a more invasive, technically more difficult method requiring a longer operative time, which may result in increased blood loss and higher complication rates (12, 13). Similarly, Kim et al. could not demonstrate any difference between ALIF and PLF with instrumentation (11). Although circumferential fusion was reported as significantly better than PLF at 6 months and 1 year in a study by Swan, no difference was determined at two years (14). In a systematic review of 29 high quality studies, Jacobs and al. found no difference between different fusion techniques (15). In the current study the treatment choice was PLF with instrumentation which is a relatively easy method with a shorter operating time and lower blood loss compared to other techniques in literature. When performing PLF, slip reduction can be achieved during the same procedure. The advantages of slip reduction include improved spine biomechanics, better nerve root decompression and a better opportunity for fusion by relieving tension and shear forces (5). Although the major disadvantage of slip reduction is increased risk of neurological injury, there have been numerous studies evaluating slip reduction for adult low grade spondylolisthesis (14, 16-18). In the current study, slip reduction was not performed to avoid the possibility of potential neurological damage and as all the cases had low grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. To protect one more mobile segment, some authors have preferred single-level postero-lateral instrumentation and fusion instead of two-level (6, 13, 15). However, there is no scientific proof to help determine the number of fusion levels and this decision is based on the surgeon’s empirical experience. In a prospective study by Inage et al, two-level fusion with local bone grafts was shown to cause increased pseudoarthrosis (6). Similarly in a study by Deguchi et al, single-level fusions showed an 82% fusion rate, and two-level fusions, a 74% rate radiologically (19). Higher fusion rates in the two-level fusion group were achieved with rigid spinal implants. The clinical success of that study correlated with the radiological fusion rates. Contrary to the information in literature, local bone grafts mixed with demineralized bone matrix (DBM) were used in the current study to achieve union for both groups and no union problem was seen in the two-level fusion group. Pseudoarthros is was observed in four cases in the one -level fusion group. Although some authors have reported incongruity between the clinical results of spondylolisthesis patients and union rates, VAS and ODI are the most reliable clinical tests to evaluate spondylolythesis (9, 10, 20). The results of the current study reveal that two-level posterior instrumentation with PLF has better results than single-level surgery according to VAS and ODI. This study has some limitations. Firstly, the retrospective design did not allow for uniformity of the groups. The number of patients was also limited to achieve generalized results. Although the pedicle screws were all 6.5 mm in size, they were not all from the same manufacturer, so implant problems were disregarded. In conclusion, this study has demonstrated that two-level posterior instrumentation and PLF with local bone grafts and DBM have significantly better clinical and radiological results than single-level surgery. To avoid potential complications of PLIF, two-level PLF can be an alternative treatment option. References 1.Floman Y. Progression of lumbosacral isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. Spine. 2000;25(3):342-7. 2.Fredrickson BE, Baker D, McHolick WJ, Yuan HA, Lubicky JP. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery American volume. 1984;66(5):699-707. 3.Osterman K, Schlenzka D, Poussa M, Seitsalo S, Virta L. Isthmic spondylolisthesis in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects, epidemiology, and natural history with special reference to disk abnormality and mode of treatment. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1993(297):65-70. 4.Moller H, Hedlund R. Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesisa prospective randomized study: part 1. Spine. 2000;25(13):1711-5. 5.Floman Y, Millgram MA, Ashkenazi E, Smorgick Y, Rand N. Instrumented slip reduction and fusion for painful unstable isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. Journal of spinal disorders techniques. 2008;21(7):477-83. 6.Inage K, Ohtori S, Koshi T, Suzuki M, Takaso M, Yamashita M, et al. One, two-, and three-level instrumented posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine with a local bone graft: a prospective study with a 2-year follow-up. Spine. 2011;36(17):1392-6. 7.Zagra A, Giudici F, Minoia L, Corriero AS, Zagra L. Long-term results of pediculo-body fixation and posterolateral fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis. European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. 2009;18 Suppl 1:151-5. 8.Bernhardt M, Swartz DE, Clothiaux PL, Crowell RR, White AA, 3rd. Posterolateral lumbar and lumbosacral fusion with and without pedicle screw internal fixation. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1992(284):109-15. 9.Fischgrund JS, Mackay M, Herkowitz HN, Brower R, Montgomery DM, Kurz LT. 1997 Volvo Award winner in clinical studies. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study comparing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation. Spine. 1997;22(24):2807-12. 10.Herkowitz HN, Kurz LT. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery American volume. 1991;73(6):802-8. 11.Kim NH, Lee JW. Anterior interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion with transpedicular fixation for isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. A comparison of clinical results. Spine. 1999;24(8):812-6; discussion 7. 12.Ekman P, Moller H, Tullberg T, Neumann P, Hedlund R. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. Spine. 2007;32(20):2178-83. 13.Madan S, Boeree NR. Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion for spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Spine. 2002;27(14):1536-42. 14.Swan J, Hurwitz E, Malek F, van den Haak E, Cheng I, Alamin T, et al. Surgical treatment for unstable low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults: a prospective controlled study of posterior instrumented fusion compared with combined anterior-posterior fusion. The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society. 2006;6(6):606-14. 15.Jacobs WC, Vreeling A, De Kleuver M. Fusion for low-grade adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: a systematic review of the literature. European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. 2006;15(4):391-402. 16.Sears W. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: restoration of sagittal balance using insert-and-rotate interbody spacers. The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society. 2005;5(2):161-9. 17.Spruit M, van Jonbergen JP, de Kleuver M. A concise follow-up of a previous report: posterior reduction and anterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic low-grade adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. 2005;14(9):828-32. 18.Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ, Lee JH, Cho KJ, Kim HG. Adding posterior lumbar interbody fusion to pedicle screw fixation and posterolateral fusion after decompression in spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Spine. 1997;22(2):210-9; discussion 9-20. 19.Deguchi M, Rapoff AJ, Zdeblick TA. Posterolateral fusion for isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults: analysis of fusion rate and clinical results. Journal of spinal disorders. 1998;11(6):459-64. 20.Ohtori S, Suzuki M, Koshi T, Takaso M, Yamashita M, Yamauchi K, et al. Single-level instrumented posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine with a local bone graft versus an iliac crest bone graft: a prospective, randomized study with a 2-year follow-up. European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society. 2011;20(4):635-9. Tables Table 1. Paramaters of groups during surgery 1

Asahi Glass

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary3 Recognizing Opportunities4 Company Structure 5 Issues Facing Asahi Glass5 Questions to Answer6 Conclusion6 Recommendations6 Executive Summary Asahi Glass Company was founded in the early 1900’s to relieve Japan’s dependence on foreign imports. It was the first successful endeavor into the flat glass industry. The company was able to continue to succeed through mergers, acquisitions, and organic growth. The company’s core businesses are: 1. Glass and related products, 2. Chemical products, 3. Ceramics and refractory products, 4. Electronic products, and 5. All other miscellaneous products The synergies that were created by combining management’s expertise with the company’s knowledge, resources, and technologies have contributed to the success of Asahi Glass Company throughout the years. The organizational structure of Asahi Glass’ domestic productions are effective for their business’. There is a top down management system, with each division having its own managers and balance sheet. However, globalization efforts have been depleting company resources in past years. Management has yet to be able to perfect their foreign operating organization. The company is unable to establish mutual trusting relationship with several overseas joint ventures. ? Asahi Glass Company was founded in 1907, by Toshiya Iwasaki, a nephew of one of the founders of the Mitsubishi business group. Iwasaki wanted to ease Japan’s dependence on imports, by establishing a flat glass industry. It took three years after production started in 1909 to make a profit, but the endeavor was well worth it; Asahi Glass Company established themselves as the dominate player in the market and has remained that way ever since. Throughout Asahi Glass’ existence, their decisions and objectives have been focused on growth. They achieve this by exploring new technologies and growing organically, as well as acquiring companies, and merging with others. Their management style is also a key factor to their success. Recognizing Opportunities During the First World War, Asahi Glass was having trouble importing the soda ash they needed for manufacturing, so they started producing it themselves. This led the company into the exploitation of the raw-materials scope economies. They soon developed technological expertise in ceramics and alkali chemicals, which became two of the three core business â€Å"pillars. † After World War II, management made a sensible strategic decision to license a new float glass process from the Pilkington Brothers in order to maintain their market position. In the 1960s, Asahi Glass took advantage of growing TV and auto industries, and moved into them, becoming a domestic leader in both industries. Soon after, they progressed into producing construction materials. When the chemical industry took off in Japan, Asahi Glass merged in with their alkalis, halogen, and other petrochemical additives. They were market leaders in every industry they infiltrated. Asahi Glass created new, unique markets and took the lead in many specialty markets. In the 1970s, the current president, Takeo Sakabe, took the initiative to introduce a fourth â€Å"pillar† to the company’s core businesses: electronics. He chose electronics because management had some expertise in it and the industry had room for growth. Asahi Glass began penetrating the global market in 1956, when they built a plant in India. Then, the company entered into joint ventures in Thailand and Indonesia in 1964 and 1972 respectively. Not long after establishing their presence in those markets for glass, Asahi Glass’ chemical business followed into the areas. Once the company began to expand, they accelerated their efforts through the 1990s. Company Structure Asahi Glass had â€Å"a matrix style organization structure. † Each of the six general divisions and the five individual divisions had their own managers and kept their own balance sheet. Asahi Glass had an International General Division, which communicated with domestic product divisions, and monitored the subsidiaries and affiliates who were abroad, as well as help formulate business plans. The company tried to localize their oversea activities, and let them manage day-to-day operations and only held executive meetings about once every four months. Issues Facing Asahi Glass In 1993, Asahi Glass’s domestic glass business was declining due to the Japanese economy. The answer for the company was to continue globalization efforts. However, the company’s quick response and accelerated efforts caused the company to lose focus of their traditional international practices. The company’s domestic operational structure was not the same as their international operating structure. Because many of the international were joint ventures, and still relatively fresh, the two companies still lacked trust and coordination. Asahi Glass was still realizing that moving into foreign markets took more integration and stronger efforts than operating domestically. Questions to Answer In 1993, president Seya was faced with a decision for the electronics department. He was analyzing a report of long term strategy for the business, and the position of its major products. The report offered proposals ranging from intense divesting, to rigorous investing. Mr. Seya needed to decide if investing the capital needed to ascertain a dominant position in the electronics business was worth the risk. His decision would be the foundation of the business’ strategic direction and he felt that direction should be aligned with Asahi Glass’ other divisions, and their overall objectives for the years to come. Conclusion Asahi Glass Company has always been an aggressive, dominant company. They exhort their knowledge, expertise, and technology in order to gain a leading position in whatever industry or market they endeavor. In the latest years, it seems that the company is trying to spread themselves too thin by globalizing. Until Asahi Glass finds a better way to organize and operate their foreign affairs, they should focus on domestic mergers, acquisitions, and internal growth. Recommendations I believe that Asahi Glass has had an excellent history of creating successful synergies that have propelled the company to success. From its beginnings in the early 1900s, the company’s management has recognized opportunities to expand their core businesses and grow organically. As their core businesses expanded, so did the company’s knowledge, experience, and technology. As these assets have interacted over the years, they have combined to make synergies that allowed the company to expand into new markets, products, and industries. Asahi Glass has an excellent foundation in the way of management as well as financial prosperity. I recommend that Asahi Glass invest in the establishment of the electronic business as a dominant position. Looking at the electronics business’ history shows that the division is among the top three in relative market position already, despite that they have a low share in the market (exhibit 10). They are also already well established, having joint ventures with at least five companies, three of which are in the top six market positions (exhibit 10). The electronic division contributed 5. 6% to sales in 1992; compared to ceramics contribution of 2. 4% (exhibit 6).

Characteristics of the Classic Monster Movie

Monster movies took hold in the early 1930’s as a new spin on the horror-psychological thrillers beginning to debut.   The monster movie genre as a whole has taken much criticism as to its merits, but it holds its weight in the box office with nearly 15% of all movie sales (Fischoff).   And, while many things can be said about the monster movie as a genre, the monster movie can be taken apart and illuminated to pick out the three core, salient characteristics found in all movies of the genre: the type of monster, the psychological aspect of the monster, and the plot of the movie, or, more succinctly, the monster’s motive. Fundamentally, certain genres lend to certain types of story arcs.   While the romantic comedy often follows a more character driven plot, where the characters find the meaning of true love, the monster movie follows a definable plot driven format.   And basically, in the plot driven movie, the overall story illustrates the efficiency of a town’s characters and how well they are able to stand up to the monster, before, either they are killed or the monster is finally neutralized or vanquished in a final, climax of a scene. To be honest, the end result of the town and its people doesn’t really matter, and any ending is entirely plausible.   But, the intrigue that makes a good monster movie is to be competently presented with the monster, the origin of the monster, and for the audience to discover what that monster wants out of the society they are terrorizing.   While the monster makes the lives of the characters in the story miserable, the audience is torn between wanting the characters to win, or actually feeling sympathy for the monster because of the conditions presented surrounding that monster’s origin. Moreover, monster movie plots have been known to fit into the plot categories and monster types to such a degree that a generator was actually created by David Neilsen.   Among the other completely hilarious and surprisingly useful generators to be had, the Monster Movie Pitch allows a user to create their own monster movie pitch by filling in the required fields.   Once filled in, the monster movie pitch is instantly created and a visitor can do what they want with the results. Because this generator actually serves to illuminate the points within this paper, a short detour will be taken.   With that said, the generator dictates that a male lead, female lead, and male sidekick are required, as well as a title.   Then the setting must be chosen: either a dark and forbidding forest, a sleepy little town, a mental institution, at sea, or ancient ruins.   Then the monster type must be selected: either the undead, extra-terrestrial, scientific abomination, creature of folklore/myth/legend, or nature gone bad.   And finally, the monster motive must be defined: revenge, to feed, to protect its young, its slumber has been disturbed, or it seeks to destroy humanity. Now, let’s see what fun can be had.   The selections have been made for the practice monster movie entitled, The Big Bad.   The rundown: heroic Zack and best buddy Trent, live in a sleepy little town and will come across an extra-terrestrial, leading lady Emily, and who seeks to destroy humanity.   Simple and sounds like a blockbuster.   Plugged into the generator, here’s the actual movie pitch: Critically acclaimed Egyptian filmmaker Aslad Assop brings his nightmare back to the screen with The Big Bad. This long awaited sequel to his international hit, Gong of Deviled Oxen, reunites aggressive shepherd Huche Ramman (Zack) with his holy guide Hammotep (Trent) in their biggest adventure yet. This time, Huche discovers messages in the entrails of his sheep and the trail leads to an extra-terrestrial temptress (Emily) who wishes to use sin to destroy all of humanity. Now the temptress is invading Huche’s Sleepy Little Town of Grozer, Egypt and only Huche’s faith can save the world! Sounds better than some of the monster movies out there.   Now, the purpose of the generator was not merely for amusement, though it was a bit of fun; however, it also serves to prove and illustrate the core, salient characteristics of the monster movie which are the type of monster, the psychological appeal of the monster, and the plot, or, motive of the monster. Because Neilsen states the monster types right out, it’s easy to realize, once they are presented in such a manner, that every monster movie (probably ever made) fits well into the categories, without even needing wriggle room.   To be precise, Neilsen states that there are five basic types of monster. The first type is the undead monster.   Now, the undead monster movie began in the 1930’s with Dracula and continued well into the freaky zombie thrillers of today like 28 Days Later and Resident Evil.   The undead category is not only chilling, but is perhaps the most used of all the monster types.   Even pop culture revolves around vampires, zombies, and the undead with shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Supernatural.   This type of monster has the greatest impact on an audience because of the psychological aspect and appeal behind that monster. Moreover, the second monster type is the extra-terrestrial and is evident in movies like Alien, War of the Worlds and Predator.   ET actually fits this category as well, though that alien is more cute and cuddly than frightening.   Now, this monster type usually has the same motive, that to destroy all of mankind, and is the least escapable of all the monster types because they take more to vanquish than simple guns and grenades.   Characters in these movies die rapidly and often, and do little but to illustrate the irk of the monster. The third monster type is known as the scientific abomination.   This is an interesting monster category because it actually encompasses many different sorts of monsters, from Frankenstein, to Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, to the Invisible Man.   In all cases, this type of monster is created, even purposefully manufactured, and the outcome is accidental and tragic.   The creator of the monster is often murdered, or lost to his darker evil side, and the characters again, serve only to be killed off as the mad scientist almost realizes his folly. The fourth type of monster is the creature from folklore/myth/legend.   This category encompasses monsters from The Mummy, to monsters in The Relic, Cerberus, and After Dark.   These monsters all have the same motive, and all, actually, seem to have become a plague to the characters because of that motive: being disturbed from their slumber, which serves to kill off most of the characters in the most violent and brutal method possible. Finally, the fifth monster type is nature gone bad.   This fits the Armageddon sort of flick, where birds, bats, plague, or impending asteroids kill off a good portion of the characters.   Movies like Stephen King’s The Birds, Armageddon, 10.5, and The Day After Tomorrow fit this category well.   The problem with this last monster type is that it differs the most dramatically from the genre because a great deal more time is spent on character growth than on the priorities of the monster, being nature, but in the end, nature usually wins out, despite how great the characterization is. Furthermore, Stuart Fischoff’s study commented on many things monster but one conclusion was striking, that â€Å"film monsters have proven to be such unforgettable characters that in many instances they have become part of our culture.†Ã‚   In fact, they are unforgettable to the degree that â€Å"most Americans would recognize a picture of Frankenstein, Dracula, King Kong, Godzilla or the Mummy before recognizing a Supreme Court Justice† (Fischoff). This conclusion is not only remarkable, it is entirely true.   John Rutledge is one of the most recently discussed Supreme Court Justices, but his name means nothing unless that person has been thoroughly engrossed in the newspaper for the past two years.   On the other hand, a person doesn’t even have to watch Godzilla to know that Godzilla is a dinosaur-like creature that wreaks havoc on Tokyo or that Dracula is a vampire with unconventional vampire powers. Additionally, the second core characteristic of monster movies is the psychological aspect and appeal of the monster.   This aspect can roughly be defined as not only the type of monster, but the character of that monster and what affect that monster has on an audience.   Fischoff’s study was also to survey a group of people and conclusively determine who the â€Å"King of Monsters† was. Turns out Dracula wins, though not because he is the most violent, nor is he the best killer among the monsters to choose from.   Freddy Krueger and Hannibal Lector obviously had the mass-slaying thing down, but they could never have the staying power that Dracula has because their nature is for violence and they lack the extreme psychological aspect that makes Dracula not only frightening, but also seductive. Monster movies are great to watch when the monster is a monster.   But, when man becomes a monster, as in the case of Hannibal Lector in Silence of the Lambs, for reasons pertaining to his youth and not some botched experiment, the movie experience becomes nearly transcendently frightful with the very real aspect that Hannibal could be a real person in a very real neighborhood.   Same with Freddy Krueger, though he at least has that whole dream-killing thing happening which makes him, in reality, a bit less plausible, though his deeds are no less terrifying. Fischoff offers some insight into this phenomena, stating that â€Å"it is believed to be the thrill of fright, the awe of the horrific, the experience of the dark and forbidden side of human behavior that lures people into the dark mouth of the theater to be spooked† (Fischoff).   Even though the man-monster takes off on a different path from the genre, hitting horror and the psychological aspect harder than ever before, people still flock to these movies in droves due to the need for fright, to experience the thrill without living the thrill (how scary would it be if Hannibal lived down the street?).   And, the best monster movies are able to produce at least that much. Moreover, according to Fischoff’s survey, the top ten monsters of all time, in order, are: Dracula, Freddy Krueger, Godzilla, Frankenstein, Chucky, Michael Myers (Halloween), King Kong, Hannibal Lector, Jason Voorhees (Friday 13th), and Alien.   It is interesting to notice when looking at this list that the monster to man-monster ratio is an exact split between the ten.   Five genuine monsters and five men-turned-monsters.   When it comes to monster movies, the best monster is obviously a cross between the most horrific and the most frightening. Furthermore, the third characteristic of monster movies is the use of plot as a device to form the movie around the monster.   Like Neilsen’s generator was helpful to suggest, there are five different plots that make up the monster movie genre, almost, in its entirety.   And, these plots all revolve around or are centered on, the motive of the monster. Basically, the monster can be out for revenge, need to feed, need to protect its young, their slumber has been disturbed, or they want to destroy humanity.   All movies created in the early black and white era actually follow this format, the most famous of them setting up the very archetype known as monster movies today. To begin with, Frankenstein (1931) demonstrates the classic revenge plot.   Dr. Henry Frankenstein wanted to make a man out of stolen body parts and actually managed to do so.   In fact, Dr. Frankenstein’s monster would have been a medical marvel if not for the criminal brain secured for his construction.   Because of that tiny little fatal flaw, the monster rises with a vendetta for Dr. Frankenstein.   And because Dr. Frankenstein screwed up, he becomes the obsession of his own creation. In Dracula (1931), Count Dracula, something of a real estate tycoon and upwardly rich aristocrat, preys on the people he comes across in Transylvania.   Dracula is different than the average monster because of his strikingly literal human nature.   He also has the enhanced ability to seduce his victims beyond their control, which makes him exceptionally difficult to properly vanquish.   The story also ends heroically as Van Helsing is proven right and is able to destroy Dracula.   Dracula’s main motive, besides amusement, is simply, to feed. King Kong (1933) differs from many monster movies because the character relationships are vitally important for the movie to progress.   There are two main relationships developed throughout, that of Ann and Jack and that of Ann and King Kong.   King Kong’s motive, once he falls for his new companion Ann, is to protect her from the evils in his jungle environment, and later, the evils he sees New York City.  Ã‚  Ã‚   One of the final lines in the movies, â€Å"it wasn’t the airplanes, it was beauty that killed the beast† strikes a cord in any heart and makes King Kong perhaps the most lovable of all movie monsters because of his human desire to protect Ann. In The Mummy (1932) a priest is resurrected accidentally by an unwitting team of archeologists and sets about seeking his lost love.   Bad things happen along the way, one of the archeologists is taken as a replacement for the mummy’s lost bride, but the mummy is vanquished in the end when the archeologists destroy the scroll that brought him back to life.   The mummy, Im-ho-tep, basically sends his wrath out on the world and spends the movie causing mass destruction because his slumber was disturbed.   Simple as that. Finally, in Godzilla (1954), Godzilla is a monster god (more like un-extinct dinosaur) that preys on the countryside of Tokyo and fits the classic monster out to destroy humanity plot.   The natives sacrifice virgins in an attempt to appease the monster, but Godzilla seems to enjoy wreaking as much destruction as possible.   The monster attacks every few scenes, with the people in a panic as to how to destroy him before they are all killed.   And, even though they manage to kill Godzilla in the end, the result is not joyful as the people still fear another Godzilla is just moments from rising from the sea. Overall, all movies follow a specific formula which can be calculated and defined based upon the genre they fall in to.   The monster movie is a cross between the horror film and the psychological thriller and has certain core, salient characteristics that define the monster movie as a genre.   Neilsen helps to illuminate the various forms of monster and monster motives with his monster movie pitch generator, and it can be said that, categorically, monster type, psychological aspect of the monster, and motive of the monster as demonstrated in the plot combine to form the core characteristics of the monster movie. Works Consulted. Fischoff, Stuart, et al.   â€Å"The Psychological Appeal of Your Favorite Movie Monsters.† International Scientific Communications, 2003. —-.   â€Å"The Psychological Appeal of Movie Monsters.†Ã‚   Journal of Media Psychology, 2005. LaBarbera, Michael.   â€Å"The Biology of B-Movie Monsters.†Ã‚   University of Chicago, 2003. Neilsen, David.   â€Å"Monster Pitch Generator.†Ã‚   Brunching Shuttlecocks, 2001. Waters, Cullen.   â€Å"The Plot Archetypes of Giant Monster Movies.†Ã‚   WordPress.com, 2005.   Zoombaba.   â€Å"Creature Feature: Monster Movie Roleplaying.†Ã‚   Accessed March 22, 2007.

Mysticeti Definition and Facts

Mysticeti refers to the baleen whales - whales that have a filtering system made up of baleen plates hanging from their upper jaw. The baleen filters the whales food from the ocean water. The taxonomic group Mysticeti is a suborder of the Order Cetacea, which includes all the whales, dolphins and porpoises. These animals may be referred to as mysticetes, or baleen whales. Some of the largest animals in the world are mysticetes. Below you can learn more about whale classification and characteristics of the whales in this group. Mysticeti Etymology The world mysticeti is thought to come from the Greek work mystà ­kÄ“tos (whalebone whale) or possibly the word mystakà ³kÄ“tos (mustache whale) and the Latin cetus (whale). In days when whales were harvested for their baleen, the baleen was called whalebone, even though it is made of protein, not bone. Whale Classification All whales are classified as vertebrate animals in the order Cetartiodactyla, which includes the even-toed ungulates (e.g., cows, camels, deer) and whales. This initially incongruous classification is based on recent findings that whales evolved from hooved ancestors. Within the Cetartiodactyla order, theres a group (infraorder) called Cetacea. This contains about 90 species of whales, dolphins and porpoises. These are further divided into two groups - Mysticeti and Odontoceti. The Mysticeti and Odontoceti are classified to as superfamilies or suborder, depending on what classification system you view. Characteristics of Mysticeti vs. Odontoceti Animals in the Mysticeti group are whales whose basic characteristics are that they have baleen, symmetrical skulls and two blowholes. Animals in the Odontoceti group have teeth, asymmetrical skulls and one blowhole. Mysticete Families Now, lets delve into the Mysticeti group. Within this group, there are four families: Right Whales (Balaenidae), which includes the North Pacific, North Atlantic and southern right whales and the bowhead whale.Pygmy Right Whale (Neobalaenidae), which includes just the pygmy right whaleGray Whales (Eschrichtiidae), which includes just the gray whaleRorquals (Balaenopteridae), which includes blue, fin, humpback, minke, sei, Brydes, and Omuras whales How Different Types of Mysticetes Feed All of the mysticetes feed using baleen, but some are skim feeders and some are gulp feeders. Skim feeders, like the right whales, have large heads and long baleen and feed by swimming through the water with their mouth open, filtering the water in the front of the mouth and out between the baleen. Rather than filtering as they swim, gulp feeders, like the rorquals, use their pleated lower jaw like a scoop to gulp in large quantities of water and fish, and then they strain the water out in between their baleen plates. Pronunciation:miss-te-see-tee References and Further Information Bannister, J.L. Baleen Whales. In Perrin, W.F., Wursig, B. and J.G.M. Thewissen. Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals. Academic Press. p. 62-73.Mead, J.G. and J.P. Gold. 2002. Whales and Dolphins in Question. Smithsonian Institution.Perrin, W. 2015. Mysticeti. In: Perrin, W.F. (2015) World Cetacea Database. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species, September 30, 2015.Society for Marine Mammalogy Committee on Taxonomy. 2014. List of Marine Mammal Species Subspecies. Accessed September 29, 2015.