1965
DOI: 10.1001/jama.194.9.949
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surgical vs nonsurgical jaundice. Differentiation by a combination of rose bengal I-131 and standard liver-function tests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

1966
1966
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This method was also adopted by Garcia et al (1959) andSchuman et al (1963), but again considerable overlap was found between the various categories in these reports, which may have been due to the fact that in conditions of hepatocellular impairment, extrahepatic uptake of bromsulphthalein occurs (Jones et al, 1961 ;Freeman et al, 1968), and therefore blood disappearance of I3lI Rose Bengal may not strictly parallel hepatic uptake. A later series by Nordyke (1965) reported an 80 per cent accuracy in the differentiation of 'medical' from 'surgical' jaundice using this technique, but no mention was made of distinction between extrahepatic obstructive jaundice and intrahepatic cholestasis, as their series contained none of the latter group of patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method was also adopted by Garcia et al (1959) andSchuman et al (1963), but again considerable overlap was found between the various categories in these reports, which may have been due to the fact that in conditions of hepatocellular impairment, extrahepatic uptake of bromsulphthalein occurs (Jones et al, 1961 ;Freeman et al, 1968), and therefore blood disappearance of I3lI Rose Bengal may not strictly parallel hepatic uptake. A later series by Nordyke (1965) reported an 80 per cent accuracy in the differentiation of 'medical' from 'surgical' jaundice using this technique, but no mention was made of distinction between extrahepatic obstructive jaundice and intrahepatic cholestasis, as their series contained none of the latter group of patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…RB has an intersystem crossing quantum yield approaching unity (F isc ¼ 0.98) and a high singlet oxygen yield (r( 1 O 2 *) > 0.75), indicating that RB is capable of highly efficient 1 O 2 * production upon irradiation with green light [8]. Its long history of safe use as a systemic diagnostic of hepatic function [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] as well as a topical ophthalmic diagnostic [22][23][24][25][26][27][28] suggests that, in marked contrast to many photodynamic therapy (PDT) agents, RB should have minimal potential for side effects, such as prolonged photosensitivity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…E HOMO indicates the ability to donate electrons while E LUMO indicates the ability to accept electrons during electronic transitions. The definition for ionization energy (I) and electron affinity (A) based on the HOMO-LUMO energy gap as I = −E HOMO and A = −E LUMO ; were involved in Koopman's theorem [21][22]31]. Softness (S) had been computed as the half of reciprocal of hardness (η) and η = (I − A)/2; while the chemical potential (μ) and electronegativity (χ) can was calculated from FMOs analysis as follows: μ = −(I + A)/2 and χ = (I + A)/2 [24].…”
Section: Fig 9 Relation Between E Homo E Lumo and E Gap Of Piog (mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has absorption coefficient in the visible region and a high tendency for inter-system crossing to produce a photochemically active triplet excited state due to its photo-activity [16]. RBeng had been used as a photodynamic sensitizer for cancer chemotherapy [19][20][21][22]. It also used as a topical ophthalmic diagnostic by Argueso et al, 2006 [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%