RESUMO
Background: We have been knowing from our past that appendix is a vestigial organ, useless to man, with no known important function, but sometimes it can cause problems, when it may become the seat of infection. The diagnosis of appendicitis is not very easy, requiring the skills of the most experienced clinician. The objective of this study was to find out and compare accuracy of USG findings with that of per-operative findings of location & status of appendix. Methods: The present prospective study was carried out in surgery department at Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Medical College, Kurud Rd, Kachandur, durg, Chhattisgarh. A total of 75 cases were selected on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria and subjected to ultrasound examination by a qualified radiologist to exclude any other associated pathology and also to confirm the diagnosis. Results: Out of 30 cases, a total of 14 cases presented with clinical features suggestive of retrocaecal appendicitis, out of which 11 had typical presentation & 3 had atypical presentation with overall sensitivity of 73.25%, followed by pelvic position which had a sensitivity of 16.29% in which 3 patients had typical presentation & 2 had atypical presentation. Conclusions: A total of five modalities that were used for the diagnosis of position of appendix & appendicitis, i.e. clinical features, lab Ix, ultrasound, intraoperative findings & histopathology, only 47% of cases all the modalities were positive.
RESUMO
Background: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is one of the most widespread non communicable diseases across the world. Two types of complications are encountered usually with DM: microvascular and macrovascular. Diabetic neuropathy is one of the most commonly occurring microvascular complications, of which the most common type is distal symmetrical neuropathy or polyneuropathy. Patients who present with diabetic foot ulceration are heterogeneous. Methods: A checklist was prepared to enter the data already recorded in the case record. This checklist was pilot-tested by recording data from positive case records before analyzing the checklist. A Research Assistant was involved in collection of data from the Medical Records. Results: In the present study, 26 patients with DM only and 40 patients with DM foot ulcers were included. With regard to gender distribution, among cases and controls, males were more compared to females. Among cases 28.7% and among controls 75% were males. Age distribution showed more than 75% of the cases and controls were in the age group of 30–60 years. In some of the cases and control subjects, the lipid profile values were not available and hence the comparison of lipid profile was done with available data. The mean values of lipid profile was high among cases compared to controls but was not statistically significant except HDL (p < 0.05). The mean HDL value for diabetic patients with foot ulcers was 37.3± 8.25 whereas that for the non-foot ulcer patients is 31.3± 7.85. Conclusion: Middle-aged male diabetics are most likely to have foot complications. It can be drawn from this study that socio-demographic factors like age, gender along with factors like glycemic control and dyslipidemia are associated with foot ulcers in diabetic patients. It is binding on the health care provider to control these have risk factors to prevent development of complications in diabetic patients with foot ulcers and improve the quality of life.