Only five (10%) of the rickettsia-positive cases evaluated by IFA
were confirmed by polymerase chain reaction. Rickettsia helvetica, Rickettsia slovaca, and Rickettsia raoultii infection appear to be prevalent in Slovakia. Furthermore, Coxiella burnetii, Borrelia and, for the first time, Bartonella elisabethae were confirmed in Slovakia.”
“Purpose: To prospectively evaluate the clinical effectiveness of snapshot inversion recovery (SNAPIR), which is a dedicated optimized inversion-recovery-prepared single-shot fast spin-echo T1-weighted sequence, in the delineation of normal fetal Nutlin-3a molecular weight brain anatomy compared with that of the currently used T1-weighted gradient-echo protocol, which often yields images of poor quality due to motion artifacts and inadequate contrast.
Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the hospital research ethics committee, and informed written consent was obtained from all patients. Forty-one fetuses were examined at 19-37 weeks gestation (mean, 29 weeks gestation) by using
both the standard T1-weighted protocol and the optimized T1-weighted SNAPIR protocol with a 1.5-T imager. Two independent blinded observers performed qualitative analysis, evaluating overall diagnostic quality, detailed anatomic delineation, and severity of motion artifacts. Quantitative analysis comprised calculation of contrast ratios (CRs) for the cortical gray ITF2357 nmr matter, subplate, white matter, and cerebrospinal fluid. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare image rating scores, the paired JPH203 price t test was used to compare CRs, and kappa statistics were used to test interobserver agreement.
Results: Both overall diagnostic quality (P < .001) and detailed anatomic delineation (P < .001) were enhanced with SNAPIR compared with the standard T1-weighted acquisition. Also, motion artifacts were less severe (P = .008) and less extensive (P < .001) with SNAPIR. Corresponding CRs were increased with
SNAPIR in seven of eight examined regions.
Conclusion: SNAPIR is a promising robust alternative to the current T1-weighted acquisitions; its role in the detection of disease requires further study. (C) RSNA, 2010″
“Introduction: Discordance between blood pressure (BP) measurement methods can occur and create ambiguity. New automated office BP monitors (AOBPs) are widely available, but their role is presently unclear. The objectives of this study are to quantify concordance among BP measurement methods and to define the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of AOBPs in a population of hypertensive patients.
Methods: The office mercury sphygmomanometer, the AOBP, an ambulatory BP monitor (ABPM), and home self-measurement with an automatic device were compared in a randomized, crossover study.