In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

Input: Consider Input: Context: To compare the efficacy and safety of prophylactic modalities for heterotopic ossification prevention after elbow and acetabular surgeries.', 'The retrospective chart review was conducted at the Aga Khan University Hospital and comprised record of patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation for elbow and acetabular fractures between 2010 and 2013. Data was classified into three groups: Group A patients had received single dose of radiotherapy; Group B patients had received indomethacin, and Group C patients had not received any prophylaxis. Outcome variables included time-to-fracture healing, heterotopic ossification, non-union and wound infection.', 'Of the 104patients 70(67.3%) had elbow fractures and 34(32.7%) had acetabular fractures. Out of the 70patients with elbow fractures, 28(27%) were in Group A, 24(23%) in Group B, and 18(17%) in Group C. In Group A, 4(22%) patients had wound infection compared to 1(5.5%) patient in Group C (p=0.131). One (4%) patient in Group B and 1(5.5%) in Group C developed heterotopic ossification (p=0.486). Non-union occurred in 1(4%) patient in Group B and 1(5.5%) in Group C. Out of the 34 patients with acetabular fractures, 11(32.3%) were in Group A, 10(29.4%) in Group B, and 13(38.2%) in Group C. In Group A, 2(18.2%) patients developed wound infection. Only 1(7.6%) patient in Group C developed heterotopic ossification.\Question: Do prophylaxis against heterotopic ossification after elbow and acetabular fractures - Do we really need it?

Output: No role of radiotherapy or indomethacin was detected in the prevention of heterotopic ossification.


Input: Consider Input: Context: Microalbuminuria and impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilation are both predictors for cardiac events in patients with type 2 diabetes. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether microalbuminuria correlated with coronary endothelium-dependent vasodilation.', 'We evaluated 84 patients (47 men, mean age 50.5 +/- 5.9 years) with type 2 diabetes for 9.4 +/- 3.4 years, without angiographic coronary stenosis and without major cardiovascular risk factors or other confounding factors, for endothelium investigation. Quantitative coronary angiography was used to assess coronary artery response to cold pressor testing, used to assess endothelium-dependent vasodilation, and to isosorbide dinitrate (endothelium-independent vasodilation).', 'Endothelium-dependent vasodilation differed in the patients with and without microalbuminuria (changes in coronary artery diameter during cold pressor testing: -15.0 +/- 1.9% vs. -10.2 +/- 1.3%, respectively, P < 0.05) and correlated with urinary albumin excretion rate (r = -0.39, P = 0.003), diastolic blood pressure (r = 0.29, P < 0.01), and left ventricular mass index (r = -0.24, P < 0.05). Independent predictors for endothelium-dependent vasodilation were urinary albumin excretion rate (beta -0.04 [95% CI -0.07 to -0.01], P < 0.005) and left ventricular mass index (-0.26 [-0.49 to -0.05], P < 0.05). Endothelium-independent vasodilation was similar in both groups.\Question: Is impaired coronary endothelium-dependent vasodilation associated with microalbuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes and angiographically normal coronary arteries?

Output: Type 2 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria have a more severely impaired coronary endothelium-dependent vasodilation than those with normoalbuminuria. These data suggest a common pathophysiological process for both coronary vasomotor abnormalities and microalbuminuria.


Input: Consider Input: Context: A cross-sectional study.', 'This study aims to investigate the correlation of the cervical canal and spinal cord size, and evaluate whether the size of the spinal cord relative to the spinal canal is a risk factor for development of cervical spinal cord compression (SCC).', 'There is little knowledge regarding the relationship between cervical bony canal and spinal cord diameters. Although developmental canal stenosis has been recognized as a risk factor for SCC, the size of the spinal cord relative to the spinal canal has not been similarly discussed.', 'Cervical canal anteroposterior (AP) diameters on X-rays and AP diameters and cross-sectional areas of dural sacs and spinal cords on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were measured in 1211 healthy volunteers. Correlation between cervical canal diameter on X-rays and AP diameter and cross-sectional area of dural sacs and spinal cords on MRI were assessed. The ratio of the AP diameter of the spinal cord/dural sac was compared between subjects with and without SCC.', 'Spinal canal diameters were not highly correlated with spinal cord AP diameters and cross-sectional areas, although spinal canal diameters were significantly correlated with dural sac AP diameters. The individual difference in the ratio of the AP diameter of the spinal cord/dural sac was large (35%-93%), and the ratio was significantly larger in the subjects with SCC. An AP diameter ratio more than 62% at the C2 to C3 disc level is a risk factor for developing SCC.\Question: Is relatively Large Cervical Spinal Cord for Spinal Canal a Risk factor for Development of Cervical Spinal Cord Compression : A Cross-Sectional Study of 1211 Subjects?


Output: The spinal cord diameter was independent of the spinal canal diameter and the relative size of a spinal cord and spinal canal differed on an individual basis. In addition, the ratio of spinal cord/dural sac in subjects with SCC was significantly larger. Therefore, a relatively large spinal cord could be a risk factor for SCC.