When is a bone scan study appropriate in asymptomatic men diagnosed with prostate cancer? / 亚洲男科学杂志(英文版)

<p><b>AIMS</b>To determine when a bone scan investigation is appropriate in asymptomatic men diagnosed with prostate cancer.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Between November 2005 and July 2006, 317 men with prostate cancer underwent a bone scan study; 176 men fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) cut-offs as well as univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses using digital rectal examination finding, biopsy Gleason scores and age were performed to determine when a bone scan study is likely to be of value.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Only 1/61 men (1.6%) with a serum PSA 20 ng/mL had a positive bone scan. However, 2/38 men (4.7%) with a serum PSA 20.1-40.0 ng/mL, 3/20 men (15%) with a serum PSA 40.1-60.0 ng/mL, 7/19 men (36.8%) with a serum PSA 60.1-100.0 ng/mL and 19/38 men (50%) with a serum PSA > 100.0 ng/mL had positive bone scans. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were uninformative in these groups.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Based on our findings, a bone scan is of limited value in asymptomatic prostate cancer patients presenting PSA =or< 20 ng/mL. Therefore, this investigation can be eliminated unless a curative treatment is contemplated. Furthermore, digital rectal examination finding, biopsy Gleason score and age are unhelpful in predicting those who might harbor bone metastasis.</p>

Comparison of body temperature recordings using mercury and liquid crystal forehead thermometers

The study was carried out to compare the recordings of body temperature using oral mercury thermometer and liquid-crystal forehead thermometer, so as to assess and ascertain the accuracy and validity of the later method. Setting: Hira General Hospital, Abbottabad. Subjects and Materials: Simultaneous recordings were made using the two devices in randomly enrolled 147 patients. The ages of patients ranged from 10 years to 90 years. FeverScan liquid-crystal forehead thermometer, Boots [UK] was used for forehead temperature while Chinese made mercury thermometer [Safety] was used to check oral temperature. Significant difference existed between the recordings of two devices. The mean difference was 1.19 degree F [p<0.001]. FeverScan liquid-crystal forehead thermometer recorded higher temperatures. In patients without pyrexia both devices recorded temperature within normal range. Conclusions: The sensitivity of FeverScan liquid-crystal forehead thermometer to detect fever was comparable to mercury thermometer but was unreliable in grading fever and showed a tendency to over estimate the temperature. It is a good device for home use but health providers should not use it. Mercury thermometer remains the gold standard