OBJECTIVETo compare the diagnostic characteristics of tests used for a prompt diagnosis of chronic osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot, using bone histology as the criterion standard. The tests assessed were probe-to-bone (PTB), clinical signs of infection, radiography signs of osteomyelitis, and ulcer specimen culture.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA prospective study was performed on patients with foot ulcers referred to our diabetic foot clinic. Ulcer infection was diagnosed by recording clinical signs of infection and taking specimens for culture. The presumptive diagnosis of osteomyelitis was based on these results and the findings of a plain X-ray and PTB test. All patients with a clinical suspicion of bone infection were subjected to surgical treatment of the affected bone. During surgery, bone specimens were obtained for a histological diagnosis of osteomyelitis.RESULTSOver 2.5 years, 210 foot lesions were consecutively examined and 132 of these wounds with clinical suspicion of infection selected as the study sample. Of these, 105 (79.5%) lesions were diagnosed as osteomyelitis. Among the tests compared, the best results were yielded by the PTB test including an efficiency of 94%, sensitivity of 98%, specificity of 78%, positive predictive value of 95%, and negative predictive value of 91% (P < 0.001, κ 0.803); the positive likelihood ratio was 4.41, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.02 (95% CI).CONCLUSIONSIn our outpatient population with a high prevalence of osteomyelitis, the PTB test was of greatest diagnostic value, especially for neuropathic ulcers, and proved to be efficient for detecting osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot.
Personalized orthotic therapy targeted at reducing plantar pressures by off-loading protects high-risk patients against reulceration. Treatment reduced the reulceration rate and peak plantar pressures, leading to patients' return to work or other activities.
Hepatic acetylator phenotype has been determined, using sulfamethazine, in 81 white Spanish women with histologically proven breast cancer and in 75 adequate female controls. No differences were detected in the distribution of acetylator phenotype between the two groups of slow acetylators, 49 patients (60.5%) and 45 controls (60%). The percentage of acetylated sulfamethazine in plasma for each phenotype was not different either. Our results suggest that there is no relationship between the hepatic acetylator polymorphism and the risk of developing breast cancer in women.
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision has emerged as the standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients. However, many cases do not respond to neoadjuvant CRT, suffering unnecessary toxicities and surgery delays. Thus, identification of predictive biomarkers for neoadjuvant CRT is a current clinical need. In the present study, microRNA-31 expression was measured in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) biopsies from 78 patients diagnosed with LARC who were treated with neoadjuvant CRT. Then, the obtained results were correlated with clinical and pathological characteristics and outcome. High microRNA-31 (miR-31) levels were found overexpressed in 34.2% of cases. Its overexpression significantly predicted poor pathological response (p = 0.018) and worse overall survival (OS) (p = 0.008). The odds ratio for no pathological response among patients with miR-31 overexpression was 0.18 (Confidence Interval = 0.06 to 0.57; p = 0.003). Multivariate analysis corroborated the clinical impact of miR-31 in determining pathological response to neoadjuvant CRT as well as OS. Altogether, miR-31 quantification emerges as a novel valuable clinical tool to predict both pathological response and outcome in LARC patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.