[Prospective evaluation of diagnostic procedures in patients suspected of malignant hepatomegaly (author's transl)].
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J Moreno.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The combination of furosemide-amiloride was used in the management of fluid retention in 16 cirrhotic patients. The study lasted 60 days. In 15 out of the 16 patients a clinical response was observed, namely increased urinary volumen and reduction of abdominal girth. The body weight was reduced by a mean of 7.7 Kg. Serum potassium rose, within normal limits, in 14 patients and a reduction of urinary potassium elimination was observed. Mild hepatic encephalopathy was noticeable in 3 cases, rapidly responding to treatment reduction or withdrawal. The combination of furosemide-amiloride seems to be of value in the management of fluid retention in liver cirrhosis and is uncommonly associated to side effects.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: In a previous report of the program of interlaboratory concordancy in the MNIH (Mexican National Institutes of Health) we observed imprecision in nearly half of the analytes assayed by participants B and J. OBJECTIVES: 1. To identify possible sources of variation in the analyzers. 2. To take corrective actions and see their effect on precision. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analyzer B had been operating for 2.5 years and analyzer J for more than ten years (Lab J switched to a new analyzer from a different supplier in the last three months of the study). Both participants submitted their daily results in commercial controls (normal and high). Lab J furnished results for a period of six months (Jul-Sep/92 using the old analyzer, and Oct-Dec using the new one) and Lab B reported five months (it used Jul to change its operating procedure). Lab B assayed 16 analytes (two electrolytes, four enzymes and ten organic analytes) and Lab J 17 (four electrolytes, four enzymes and nine organic). They also agreed to maintain a logbook of any change in calibrators, controls, reagents, analysts, or operating procedures. The information of the first two months was used in a multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) using the control assays as the dependent variable, and the logbook notations as the independent variables. Precision was expressed as a monthly mean of means of CVs of all analytes. RESULTS: The MANOVA identified two sources of variation in analyzer B: 1) recalibrations (done fortnightly in an effort to improve performance); 2) control flasks. A restriction of calibrations led to an improvement in precision, i.e. from a CV of 5-7% in Aug-Sep to 3-4% in Oct-Dec. In the old analyzer of Lab J, the MANOVA was unable to identify causes of the high imprecision (CVs of 14-19% in Jul-Sep). With the new analyzer, precision improved (CV of 6% in Nov-Dec). Two observations of interest in the new analyzer were: a) a period of familiarization with the apparatus was apparently needed (CV was 11% in Oct); b) imprecision persisted in three analytes (CVs of 11-14% in BUN, calcium, and triglycerides in Nov-Dec). A second MANOVA in this lapse also failed to identify sources of variation for these three analytes. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Analyzer B is operating at an acceptable level of precision and can fully participate in our program. 2. The new analyzer of J can participate in the assays of 14 analytes.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.