RESUMO
Pes anserinus bursitis is a differential diagnosis for knee pain, that may be misdiagnosed. Without proper physical examination and thorough history taking, the diagnosis of pes anserinus may be delayed. We present a case report of this condition, involving both primary care and the emergency department. This case illustrates one possible presentation of this condition, and also demonstrates the risks of overreliance on imaging modalities in primary care, without also performing a proper physical examination of musculoskeletal presentations. The teamwork between physiotherapists and clinicians, in this case, highlights the value of a multidisciplinary team in sports medicine. This case report lends evidence that pes anserinus bursitis should be considered as a possible diagnosis for knee pain and emphasises the importance of physical examination.
RESUMO
This case report and literature review aim to explore the range of injuries sustained in the sport of freediving. The case report involves a 37-year-old patient who sustained a pneumothorax secondary to freediving. We conducted the literature review to analyse the injuries associated with freediving. We used the combination of search terms 'freediving", "injuries", and "breath-hold diving" on the database PubMed®. A total of 40 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. The search revealed a wide range of ophthalmological, pulmonary, neurological, ear, nose, and throat injuries, along with several fatalities. Freediving is a sport performed in extreme environments and, if undertaken by inexperienced, untrained, or competition divers, can lead to severe injury or even death. However, the risk of damage can be reduced by performing it responsibly with the appropriate training and by using proper safety measures. Future research is warranted into the psychological, physiological, and economic benefits of freediving at both individual and community levels.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Veliparib, a PARP inhibitor, demonstrated clinical activity in combination with oral cyclophosphamide in patients with BRCA-mutant solid tumors in a phase I trial. To define the relative contribution of PARP inhibition to the observed clinical activity, we conducted a randomized phase II trial to determine the response rate of veliparib in combination with cyclophosphamide compared with cyclophosphamide alone in patients with pretreated BRCA-mutant ovarian cancer or in patients with pretreated primary peritoneal, fallopian tube, or high-grade serous ovarian cancers (HGSOC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Adult patients were randomized to receive cyclophosphamide alone (50 mg orally once daily) or with veliparib (60 mg orally once daily) in 21-day cycles. Crossover to the combination was allowed at disease progression. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were enrolled and 72 were evaluable for response; 38 received cyclophosphamide alone and 37 the combination as their initial treatment regimen. Treatment was well tolerated. One complete response was observed in each arm, with three partial responses (PR) in the combination arm and six PRs in the cyclophosphamide alone arm. Genetic sequence and expression analyses were performed for 211 genes involved in DNA repair; none of the detected genetic alterations were significantly associated with treatment benefit. CONCLUSION: This is the first trial that evaluated single-agent, low-dose cyclophosphamide in HGSOC, peritoneal, fallopian tube, and BRCA-mutant ovarian cancers. It was well tolerated and clinical activity was observed; the addition of veliparib at 60 mg daily did not improve either the response rate or the median progression-free survival.
