Practical uses of contrast‐enhanced spectral mammography in daily work: A pictorial review

Contrast‐enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) has a number of uses including the work‐up of inconclusive findings on mammography, assessment of breast symptoms, cancer staging, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and recently as an alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in high‐risk screening. CESM can be swiftly incorporated into the workflow of busy breast clinics. We share our experiences with CESM at a large breast assessment centre in Western Australia.     

Tacrolimus Combined with Two Different Dosages of Sirolimus in Kidney Transplantation: Results of a Multicenter Study

Tacrolimus combined with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an effective regimen in kidney transplantation. This study compared the efficacy of combining tacrolimus and two different dosages of sirolimus with an established tacrolimus-MMF regimen. Each day in addition to tacrolimus, 325 patients received 2 mg sirolimus (TAC-SRL2 mg), 325 patients received 0.5 mg sirolimus (TAC-SRL0.5 mg) and 327 patients 1 g MMF (TAC-MMF). The initial tacrolimus dose was 0.2 mg/kg/day. Sirolimus patients received loading doses of 6 or 1.5 mg, and daily doses of 2 or 0.5 mg thereafter. Steroid administration was identical for all groups. The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was lower in the TAC-SRL2 mg group (15.7%) compared with the TAC-SRL0.5 mg (25.2%, p = 0.003) and the TAC-MMF groups (22.3%, p = 0.036). Six-month graft survival was 91.0% (TAC-SRL2 mg), 92.6% (TAC-SRL0.5 mg) and 92.4% (TAC-MMF); the respective values for patient survival were 98.1%, 97.8% and 97.9%. Thirty-four patients (10.5%), 19 patients (5.8%) and 16 patients (4.9%) in the TAC-SRL2 mg, TAC-SRL0.5 mg and TAC-MMF groups, respectively, discontinued the study because of adverse events. Hyperlipemia was reported more often in the TAC-SRL2 mg group (24.0%) compared with 19.4% (TAC-SRL0.5 mg) and 11.0% (TAC-MMF; p < 0.05). Combining 2 mg sirolimus/day with tacrolimus results in lower rates of acute rejection, but a higher incidence of adverse events.     

A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Contrast Baths

Study DesignSystematic review.IntroductionContrast baths are used as an intervention in hand therapy, yet it is unclear which patients, if any, benefit from this intervention.Purpose of the StudyTo examine the nature and quality of the evidence regarding the use of contrast baths using a systematic review process.MethodsOf a total of 28 clinical research articles on contrast baths, from 1938 forward, ten met the inclusion criteria set by the authors.ResultsThese studies addressed the physiological changes of hot and cold on blood flow, intramuscular temperature, subcutaneous temperature, and the influence of room temperature and age. The subjects included normal/healthy volunteers and patients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes, or foot/ankle injuries. The diversity of conditions, protocols, and outcomes limited the ability to make definitive conclusions on efficacy.ConclusionsThe contrast bath procedure may increase superficial blood flow and skin temperature, though the evidence on the impact on edema is conflicting. No relationship between physiologic effects and functional outcomes has been established.Level of Evidence: 2A