Studies of the association between porphyria cutanea tarda (PCT) and primary liver cancer have produced conflicting reports. The incidence of this liver tumor was studied in 138 PCT patients (7.2%) and in 358 non‐porphyric cirrhotic patients (5.6%), and no statistically significant differences were found between them (p>0.5). Nevertheless the incidence of such association was significantly higher (chi square=10.91, p<0.001) in the PCT group (24.3%) than in the non‐porphyric cirrhotic group (6.7%) when only males with underlying liver cirrhosis were considered. These results suggest that the high incidence of liver tumor in PCT is not merely related to hepatic cirrhosis. The cause of such as association remains unclear. Primary liver cancer may reveal a prior deficiency in uroporphyrinogen‐decarboxylase, but the possibility that the enzyme abnormalities were caused by the liver carcinoma also exists.
An epidemiological survey was conducted in southeast Mexico, in an effort to establish the serological reactivity and carrier status to Babesia bigemina of an indigenous cattle population. The prevalence was obtained through the Indirect Fluorescent Antibody Test (IFAT), using an in vitro culture-derived B. bigemina antigen. A specific, digoxigenin-coupled, approximately 6 Kb B. bigemina-DNA probe (BBDP), was used to indicate the presence of the parasite. Serum samples from 925 animals of all ages, were obtained within the three regions (I, II, III) of the state of Yucatan and tested by IFAT. In addition, whole blood samples drawn from 136 of the same animals of region II were analyzed using the BBDP. Positive IFAT (IFAT+) reactions were observed in 531 sera for a 57% overall prevalence. Regional values were: I = 157+ (56%), II = 266+ (68%) and III 108+ (42%). Only 32 (23%) of the blood samples tested with BBDP showed distinctive hybridization signal, in contrast with 100 (73%) IFAT+ animals. The response distribution for IFAT vs. BBDP was: +/+ 23, +/- 77, -/+ 9 and -/- 27 respectively. It was found that the analytical sensitivity of BBDP appears to be low for its utilization in widespread epidemiological surveys. It was considered, however, that the colorimetric probe might be useful to safely detect transmission prone carriers, since it is able to detect parasitemias as low as 0.001%.
To determine if there is any difference in nerve conduction studies or sympathetic skin response (SSR) between patients on peritoneal dialysis and those on regular hemodialysis, we did a cross-sectional observational study. The study group consisted of 24 patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) (12 men, aged 45 +/- 17 years) and 20 patients on hemodialysis (HD) (11 men, aged 50 +/- 22 years). All of these patients were in stable clinical condition, they were receiving adequate dialysis, and none of them had systemic diseases. Motor and sensory nerve conduction studies of the common and medial peroneal nerve and SSR were performed in all patients. There were no differences in motor and sensory nerve conduction velocities between PD and HD patients. All PD patients had detectable SSR. However, six patients on HD (30%) failed to show SSR (p < 0.05). Mean SSR amplitude was higher in PD patients than in HD patients (1233 +/- 843 vs. 605 +/- 771 microv, p < 0.05). There were no differences in mean SSR latency between PD and HD patients. PD modality (continuous ambulatory PD vs. automated PD) or the presence of residual renal function did not influence nerve conduction studies or SSR. In conclusion, using standard nerve conduction studies, no differences could be found between HD and PD. However, a higher proportion of patients on HD showed an impaired SSR, suggesting that subclinical neuropathy may be more common in HD than PD patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.