Donor Infection and Transmission to the Recipient of a Solid Allograft

Transmission of infection from donor to recipient is a potential complication of transplantation. More data on this issue are needed to expand the insufficient donor pool. This study evaluates the incidence of donor nonviral infection, transmission from infected donors and the effect of donor infection on 30‐day recipient survival. Data from 211 infected donors contributing to 292 (8.8%) of 3322 consecutive transplant procedures within RESITRA (Spanish Research Network for the Study of Infection in Transplantation) were prospectively compiled and analyzed. Lung was the most likely transplanted organ carried out with an infected donor and Staphylococcus aureus was the most commonly isolated microorganism. In more than a half of donors, the lung was the site of infection. Donor‐to‐host transmission was documented in 5 patients out of 292 (1.71%), 2 of whom died of the acquired infection (40%). Nonetheless, there was no difference in 30‐day patient survival when comparing transplant procedures performed with organs from infected or uninfected donors. In conclusion, donor infection is not an infrequent event, but transmission to the recipient is quite low. Hence, with careful microbiological surveillance and treatment, the number of organs available for transplantation may be increased.     

Recommendations for implementation of high dose rate 192Ir brachytherapy in developing countries by the Advisory Group of International Atomic Energy Agency.

PURPOSE: To provide recommendations for the implementation of high dose rate (HDR) 192Ir brachytherapy technology in developing countries.METHODS: An Advisory Group Meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) met to address the implementation of HDR 192Ir brachytherapy technology in developing countries. These recommendations reflect only the personal opinions of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the IAEA.RESULTS: An HDR treatment system should be purchased as a complete unit that includes the 192Ir radioactive source, source loading unit, applicators, treatment planning system, and control console. Infrastructure support may require additional or improved buildings and procurement of or access to new imaging facilities. A supportive budget is needed for quarterly source replacement and the annual maintenance necessary to keep the system operational. The radiation oncologist, medical physicist, and technologist should be specially trained before HDR can be introduced. Training for the oncologist and medical physicist is an ongoing process as new techniques or sites of treatment are introduced. Procedures for quality assurance (QA) of patient treatment, and the planning system must be introduced. Emergency procedures with adequate training of all associated personnel must be in place.CONCLUSIONS: The decision to select HDR in preference to alternate methods of brachytherapy is influenced by the ability of the machine to treat a wide variety of clinical sites. In departments with personnel and budgetary resources to support this equipment appropriately, economic advantage becomes evident only if large numbers of patients are treated. Intangible benefits of source safety, personnel safety, and easy adaptation to fluctuating demand for treatments also require consideration when evaluating the need to introduce this treatment system.     

The efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine and paroxetine in outpatients with depressive disorder or dysthymia

A 24-week, double-blind, randomized trial was performed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine and paroxetine in patients with major depression or dysthymia. Outpatients aged 18-70 years with a baseline score of 17 on the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to venlafaxine, 37.5 mg, in the morning and evening or paroxetine, 20 mg, in the morning and placebo in the evening, which could be increased to venlafaxine, 75 mg twice daily, or paroxetine, 20 mg twice daily, after 4 weeks. Efficacy was assessed with the 21-item HAM-D, the Montgomery-Asberg Rating Scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, and the Clinical Global Impressions Scale. Forty-one patients were randomized to venlafaxine and 43 to paroxetine. At week 6, a response was observed in 55% of patients on venlafaxine and 29% on paroxetine (P = 0.03). At week 12, significantly (P = 0.011) more patients in the venlafaxine group had a HAM-D remission score of 8 or less (59% versus 31%). Discontinuation for any reason occurred in 16 (39%) patients on venlafaxine and 11 (26%) on paroxetine. The most common adverse events were nausea (28%), headache (18%) and dry mouth (15%) with venlafaxine and headache (40%) and constipation (16%) with paroxetine. Venlafaxine was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of patients with mild to moderate depression or dysthymia. A consistently higher proportion of patients had a response or remission on venlafaxine than on paroxetine.     

Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration in prostatic abscess

OBJECTIVES: To review the clinical presentation of prostatic abscess and to assess the usefulness of ultrasound-guided needle aspiration as a treatment option for this condition. METHODS: Between October 1984 and November 1997, prostatic abscess was diagnosed in 31 patients. The average age was 60 years (range 29 to 79). Prostate ultrasound was performed using either a hypogastric or transrectal approach. Initial therapy included ultrasound-guided needle aspiration in 24 (77.4%), transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) in 5 (16.1%), or conservative management with antibiotic therapy. During follow-up, ultrasound examinations and urine cultures were performed on an outpatient basis. RESULTS: Past medical history most often included previous urinary infection (15 patients, 48%) and bladder outlet obstruction (13 patients, 42%). Sixty-one percent of patients presented with irritative voiding symptoms at the time of diagnosis. Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration resolved 83.3% of cases; 2 patients needed a second procedure. Three patients required TURP for drainage and 2 to remove an obstruction after abscess resolution. CONCLUSIONS: A high degree of suspicion is needed to diagnose prostatic abscess clinically. Transrectal ultrasound is necessary for the differential diagnosis. Transrectal ultrasound-guided needle aspiration is a technically simple and effective therapeutic procedure with no morbidity and, in case of failure, may be repeated or a drainage TURP may be undertaken.