[Pulse wave velocity of the leg minus that of the arm measured with a custom device correlates to the coronary calcium quantification]. / La velocidad de onda de pulso de la pierna menos brazo medida con un dispositivo propio se correlaciona con la cuantificación de calcio coronario.

OBJECTIVE: The pulse wave velocity (PWV) in the great arteries is an indicator of vascular risk. Our objective was to identify the PWV index between the arms and legs that best correlates with the coronary calcium quantification (CCQ) and to compare it with other methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eight-one patients without vascular disease underwent the following measurements: CCQ; carotid intima-media thickness (IMT); carotid-femoral PWV (cfPWV), using COMPLIOR; and PWV in the arms and legs, with our own device (abiPWV, ankle brachial index PWV). RESULTS: The difference in PWVs between the leg and arm (l-a PWV) measured with abiPWV was the index that best correlated with CCQ (r=0.401, P<.001). The correlation between IMT and CCQ and between CF-PWV and CCQ were r=0.366, P=.001; and r=0.385, P=.001, respectively. For a CCQ score higher than 100 as a marker of significant coronary arteriosclerosis, the areas under the curve for l-a PWV, IMT and cfPWV were 0.721 (P=.002), 0.758 (P<.001) and 0.636 (P=.058), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For patients without vascular disease, the l-a PWV measured with abiPWV appears to be the index that best correlates with the CCQ. This association is comparable to that between IMT and CCQ and between cfPWV and CCQ. The abiPWV is an easy-to-use device that can help improve vascular risk stratification.

Hepatosplenic brucelloma: clinical presentation and imaging features in six cases.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the clinical presentation and the computed tomographic (CT) and ultrasound (US) findings in six episodes of hepatosplenic brucelloma in five patients. METHODS: In four episodes, the diagnosis was based on clinical history, serology, and characteristic imaging findings. In the other two episodes in the same patient, the diagnosis was suspected after a biopsy was taken. CT was performed in all six cases and US in five. RESULTS: On US, brucellomas were iso- or hypoechogenic with the liver. Hyperechogenic masses were seen in one patient. Brucellomas were very poorly defined and contained small scattered cystic areas. All lesions showed central or marginal gross focal calcification, except multiple lesions in one patient. Contrast-enhanced CT showed predominantly solid masses with irregular borders and fine or thick enhancing trabeculations separating hypodense solid areas and/or small cystic areas. Two patients showed transdiaphragmatic lung invasion by brucelloma, a complication not previously published. CONCLUSION: In regions where brucellosis is endemic, brucelloma should be included in the differential diagnosis if a hepatic or splenic mass with irregular borders and central or marginal gross focal calcification is detected, and contrast-enhanced CT shows enhancing trabeculations that separate hypodense solid areas and/or small liquid collections.