Superselective splenic artery embolization for the management of splenic laceration following colonoscopy

Splenic injury is a rare complication following colonoscopy with fewer than 100 reported cases worldwide to date. We describe a case of splenic laceration presenting 5 days following diagnostic colonoscopy. Although hemodynamically stable, active contrast extravasation on contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography predicted likely failure of conservative management. Splenic artery angiography confirmed active extravasation from the lower splenic pole and the patient was successfully treated with super selective coil embolization of a lower pole splenic artery branch. This is the eighth reported case of endovascular treatment of splenic injury following colonoscopy. To our knowledge, however, superselective splenic artery embolization has not been previously reported to treat this rare endoscopic complication

Diagnostic value of attenuation measurements of the kidney on unenhanced helicoidal CT of obstructive ureterolithiasis

BV UNIFESP: Teses e dissertaçõe

Complexation of Re-188-phosphonates: in vitro and in vivo studies

MDP (methylenediphosphonate) and HEDP (hydroxyethylidene diphosphonate), both diphosphonates, and EDTMP (ethylenediamine tetramethylene phosphonic acid), a tetraphosphonate ligand, have been previously labeled with Re-188 for use in metastatic bone-pain palliation. the aim of this study was a comparison between the three complexes Re-188-MDP, Re-188-HEDP and Re-188-EDTMP concerning the complexation conditions, in order to achieve maximum yield, stability and bone uptake. Methods: MDP was dissolved in water and HEDP and EDTMP were dissolved in NaOH 1 N followed by reduction of pH with HCl 1 N. To all mixtures stannous chloride and (ReO4-)-Re-188 were added in a nitrogen atmosphere. the preparations were heated in boiling water bath for 15 min. Yield as well as radiochemical stability was estimated by ITLC. Different concentrations of phosphonates and stannous chloride were evaluated. Biodistribution studies in Swiss mice were done for the three Re-188-phosphonates that presented the best radiochemical yield. the optimal ligand concentration for maximum complexation was 85.2 mM for MDP, 72.8 mM for HEDP and 45.8 mM for EDTMP. the best amount of SnCl2-2H(2)O was 1.5 mg/mL for Re-188-HEDP and 1 mg/mL for both Re-188-MDP and Re-188-EDTMP. in these conditons the three complexes showed a complexation rate above 95%. Reasonable radiochemical stability for 24 hours was achieved by Re-188-EDTMP when employing ascorbic acid. All products showed a great uptake by the kidneys. Re-188-EDTMP had the greatest uptake by femur (3.1 +/- 0.2% ID/g) followed by Re-188-MDP (1.2 +/- 0.1% ID/g) and Re-188-HEDP (1.0 +/- 0.1% ID/g), 4 hours post injection. Re-188-EDTMP displayed a femur bone/muscle ratio of 28.5, Re-188-MDP 4.9 and Re-188-HEDP 4.9. in conclusion Re-188-EDTMP demonstrated the best potential as a radiopharmaceutical for bone cancer pain relief, encouraging further dosimetric studies and clinical trials.IPEN, CNEN, Radiopharm Ctr, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, São Paulo, BrazilWeb of Scienc

Preregistration of studies with existing data

Preregistration of research plans is becoming an increasingly popular and common tool to enhance the transparency of a study’s methodology. In a preregistration, researchers document their research plans and register them to a public repository prior to conducting their research. In this chapter, we provide arguments for why preregistration can protect scientific findings against questionable research practices (QRPs), such as outcome swapping, selective reporting of conditions, unwarranted data exclusions, and post hoc changing of hypotheses. Furthermore, we place particular emphasis on preregistering research plans when using existing data, and we give an overview of preregistration templates and public repositories for different types of research designs. We conclude this chapter with highlighting some of the common criticisms of preregistration and our counter-arguments and provide future reflections