荧光原位杂交法快速鉴定血培养阳性葡萄球菌的临床应用

目的快速鉴定血培养中的金黄色葡萄球菌和凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌(CoNS),结合临床快速判定是否为污染菌。方法采用荧光原位杂交法鉴定血培养中的金黄色葡萄球菌和CoNS,杂交结果若为CoNS,根据临床资料进行判断,并与文献推荐的污染判断法进行结果比较。结果探针的特异性经由标准菌株和临床分离菌株证实。金黄色葡萄球菌探针的特异性和敏感性均为100%,GoNS探针的特异性和敏感性分别为100%和95.5%。179株CoNS中117株判断为污染菌,污染率为68%,与文献推荐的污染判断方法一致。结论荧光原位杂交法适用于血培养中的金黄色葡萄球菌和CoNS的快速鉴定,以排除CoNS污染。     

The numb chin.

An apparently innocuous complaint such as a numb chin may be associated with malignant disease, either as heralding symptom or as a manifestation of metastasis. A series of 15 patients with numbness of the chin is presented in which a malignancy was diagnosed prior to the numbness. The numbness diminished or disappeared in 66% of the patients following either systemic chemotherapy or radiotherapy.     

偏头痛大鼠脑内5-羟色胺1F和诱导型一氧化氮合酶基因的表达变化及针刺的干预效应

目的:前期实验已证实针刺治疗偏头痛疗效优越。观察针刺对偏头痛大鼠脑内5-羟色胺1F和诱导型一氧化氮合酶mRNA表达的调控作用。方法:实验于2005-11/2006-05在中南大学湘雅医院中西医结合研究所实验室完成。①选用SD大鼠40只,按随机数字表法分为4组(n=10),除正常对照组外,其余3组均复制大鼠偏头痛模型。模型对照组只造模,不作其他处理;针刺治疗组造模后进行针刺;针刺预防组针刺后造模电刺激20min。针刺方法:针刺大鼠双侧太冲、阳陵泉穴20min。采用疏密波,电流强度0.3～0.6mA,留针20min,1次/d,共5次。②实验完毕后取脑干及三叉神经节匀浆,采用反转录-聚合酶链反应法测定5-羟色胺1F和诱导型一氧化氮合酶mRNA表达。结果:进入结果分析正常对照组10只,模型对照组、针刺治疗组、针刺预防组各9只,共脱失3只。①与正常对照组比较,模型对照组大鼠诱导型一氧化氮合酶mRNA表达显著增强(P<0.01),5-羟色胺1FmRNA表达显著减弱(P<0.01)。②与模型对照组比较,针刺预防组和针刺治疗组诱导型一氧化氮合酶mRNA表达明显减弱(P<0.01),5-羟色胺1FmRNA表达显著增强(P<0.01)。结论:针刺调控5-羟色胺1F和诱导型一氧化氮合酶mRNA的表达可能是针刺防治偏头痛的分子机制。     

Penetrating abdominal vena cava injuries.

OBJECTIVE: The surgical management and outcome of abdominal vena cava (AVC) injuries is presented. STUDY DESIGN, PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective record review of patients with AVC injuries treated in the Trauma Unit at Groote Schuur Hospital between January 1999 and December 2003 was undertaken. Demographic data, mechanism of injury, surgical management, associated injuries, duration of hospital stay, complications and mortality were extracted from patient records. Patients with acute peritonitis and/or shock underwent emergency laparotomy. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with AVC injuries were identified. Gunshot wounds accounted for 45 (94%) injuries. The mean weighted revised trauma score, injury severity score (ISS) and penetrating abdominal trauma index (PATI) were 6.3, 24 and 42, respectively. The AVC injury was infrarenal and suprarenal in 41 and seven patients, respectively. Thirty injuries were ligated. There were 15 deaths (31%). Significant differences between survivors and non-survivors included ISS, preoperative hypotension and blood transfusion requirements, whereas site of injury, PATI, and surgical management did not. CONCLUSION: Abdominal vena cava injuries are associated with a high mortality. Ligation of the AVC in critically ill patients is a feasible and life-saving option.     

Retrorenal colon: implications for percutaneous diskectomy

It has been recommended that computed tomography (CT) with the patient prone be performed in every patient undergoing percutaneous diskectomy; this would enable detection of a retrorenal location of the colon, which could interfere with the percutaneous procedure. In this evaluation of 346 prone CT studies, only one patient (0.29%) was found to have retrorenal or retropsoas bowel that would have been perforated at diskectomy. Because of this extremely low prevalence, the performance of prone CT in every patient undergoing percutaneous lumbar diskectomy is not believed to be necessary.     

Donor insemination: Dutch parents' opinions about confidentiality and donor anonymity and the emotional adjustment of their children

Results from a comparative study investigating 38 donor insemination (DI) Dutch families with 4-8 year old children are presented. The aims of this study were to investigate parents' opinions on the issues of confidentiality and donor anonymity, to assess the emotional development of the children, and to examine in DI families the association between secrecy with regard to the use of a donor and the emotional adjustment of the children. The DI families were compared to families with a child conceived by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and to families with a naturally conceived child. Secrecy appeared to be associated with DI and not with IVF: 74% of the DI parents intended not to inform the child about the way in which she/he was conceived, whereas none of the IVF parents intended to keep the secret. Only one set of DI parents and two sets of IVF parents had actually told the child. As to donor anonymity, a spread of opinions appeared among DI parents; 57% preferred an anonymous donor, 31% would have liked non- identifying information about the donor, 9% preferred the donor's identity to be registered and 3% remained unsure. Parents' major concern was to know more about the medical/genetic background of the donor. Mothers and fathers in the DI families differed in their opinions concerning the issues of confidentiality and donor anonymity: fathers, more often than mothers, were secretive with regard to the use of a donor and husbands, more often than their wives, were in favour of donor anonymity. With regard to the emotional development of the children, more emotional/behavioural problems were revealed among DI children than among children who were naturally conceived. No association was found between secrecy and the emotional/behavioural adjustment of the children.      

Anonymous or identity-registered sperm donors? A study of Dutch recipients' choices

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to gain insight into parents' own donor preferences within a system offering the choice between an anonymous and identity-registered donor. A comparison was made between recipients choosing for an anonymous donor (AD choosers) and those choosing for an identifiable donor (ID choosers) with regard to their sexual orientation, demographic characteristics, disclosure issues and infertility distress. METHODS: Data from 105 couples (61% heterosexual, 39% lesbian) were registered on a standardized form during implication counselling sessions previous to treatment. RESULTS: Sixty-three per cent of the heterosexual couples and 98% of the lesbian couples had chosen an ID donor. Major differences between ID and AD choosers were identified. Among the ID choosers secrecy towards the child was no option, whereas 83% of the AD choosers did not intend to inform their child. Compared with heterosexual ID choosers, AD choosers were more distressed about their infertility and had a lower educational level. CONCLUSION: Legislation imposing ID donors appears to be acceptable for the majority of this study population. For a vulnerable group of heterosexual couples, who remained secretive about the use of a donor, adaptation to the new system is not self-evident.