Showing 2 results for Probe
D Sharifi Doloui,
Volume 12, Issue 4 (2-1999)
Abstract
The goal of this study was to compare the effect of heater probe thermocoagulation
for massive bleeding of peptic ulcers with a control group. Between March 1992 and
August 1995 we used heater probe thermocoagulation endoscopically to treat 42
patients with active UGl bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels at the base of ulcer
craters within 2-3 hours of admission. We also selected 42 patients with active
bleeding or non bleeding visible vessels who did not receive any endoscopic
treatment but were instead treated conservatively as the control group.
The energy applied to each of our patients in the heater probe group was
105±22.5 J (mean±SD). Rebleeding occurred within 2-5 days in 2 patients (4.7%) in
the heater pro be group versus 9 patients (21.4 % ) in the control group (p= 0.05). Mean
duration of admission in the heater probe group was 4.3±3.1 days versus 6.9±3.8 days
in the control group which was comparable (p= 0.0027).
There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups
concerning transfusion requirement and mortality. Heater probe therapy was tolerated
by the patients very well and no complications occurred.
Heater probe thermocoagulation is an effective, safe and economical procedure
for treating peptic ulcer bleeding.
M Nasrollahei, Hg Robson,
Volume 17, Issue 2 (8-2003)
Abstract
We investigated the use of DNA amplification by polymerase chain reaction
(peR) for detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in 300 patients who were
suspected of having pulmonary tuberculosis and compared the results with culture
results which were performed in parallel with PCR. Two-thirds of each sample
was processed for smear and culture by standard methods and one-third was prepared
for DNA extraction, amplification and detection using Mycobacterium tuberculosis
specific PCR primers. In this study 45 patients were positive for M.
tuberculosis by PCR and probe hybridization (sensitivity and specificity 100%)
whereas 42 patients (93%) exhibited growth of M. tuberculosis. Of 42 culture
positive specimens 3 exhibited negative PCR results.
Smear positivity rate for PCR positive specimens was 73.2%. For analysis of
discrepant results 3 variables such as the source of specimen, the concentration of
bacteria in the original specimen and the presence of inhibitor were examined. It
was found that only 3 sputum specimens (6.6%) gave discrepant results, which
were found to contain inhibitor of amplification. It remains to be shown whether
positive PCR results in smear and culture negative patients mean false positivity
or an early laboratory finding which predicts a subsequent reactivation of a prior
tuberculosis infection or whether asymptomatic patients may carry PCR amplifiable
Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA without any clinical relevance.
