METHODS: High-frequency ultrasound (HFU) images of 30 wounds were acquired in a controlled environment on post-debridement days 7, 14, 21, and 28. Meaningful features portraying changes in structure and intensity of echoes during healing were extracted from the images, their relevance and discriminatory power being verified by analysis of variance. Relative analysis of tissue healing was conducted by developing a features-based healing function, optimised using the pattern-search method. Its performance was investigated through leave-one-out cross-validation technique and reconfirmed using principal component analysis.
RESULTS: The constructed healing function could depict tissue changes during healing with 87.8% accuracy. The first principal component derived from the extracted features demonstrated similar pattern to the constructed healing function, accounting for 86.3% of the data variance.
CONCLUSION: The developed wound analysis technique could be a viable tool in quantitative assessment of diabetic foot ulcers during healing.
CASE REPORT: We report a case of myofibroblastoma in an octogenarian male presenting with painless solitary breast lump. Mammography (digital tomosynthesis) and ultrasound showed a well-circumscribed hyperdense mass and hypoechoic, solid, oval mass with peripheral vascularity respectively. Patient underwent wide local excision.
DISCUSSION: Diverse characteristics of myofibroblastoma on imaging necessitates histopathological analysis for an accurate diagnosis. Myofibroblastoma are often confused with fibroadenomas due to the benign imaging characteristics and with malignant neoplasia due to their wide morphological spectrum. Surgical excision is considered curative.
METHODS: It was a cross-sectional study carried out at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC), Malaysia. Records of patients with focal thyroid nodules on ultrasound (US) for which US-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) was performed and pathology results were available, from January 2014 to May 2016 were selected for review. Correlation of the U Classification with pathology results was assessed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were calculated in a conservative and non-conservative method. The threshold for statistical performance was set at 0.05. Each sonographic feature was also compared with its pathology results.
RESULTS: A total of 91 patients with 104 nodules were eligible. 12 nodules out of 104 (11.5%) were malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were 100%, 91.3%, 11.5, 0.0, 60%, 100% and 92.3%, and 100%, 91.4%, 11.7%, 0.0, 78.6%, 100% and 93.5%, for the non-conservative and conservative method of calculations respectively.
CONCLUSION: The U Classification is reliable in predicting thyroid malignancy. More evidence is nevertheless necessary for widespread adaptation and use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective follow-up study on patients with clinically confirmed stress urodynamic incontinence and urodynamic stress incontinence who had undergone MiniArc or Monarc surgery. Data regarding preoperative evaluation, intraoperative complications and post-operative follow-ups were collated. Main outcome is to determine the change in position of the sling through measurement of the x- and y-axis at rest and during Valsalva maneuver using the 3D introital ultrasound.
RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were evaluated, 82 belonged to Monarc and 56 to MiniArc. At 3years, objective and subjective cure rates for MiniArc and Monarc were comparable (88%, 91%; p>0.05; 83%, 89%, p>0.05 respectively). Ultrasonographic changes between MiniArc and Monarc from 6 months to 3 years, showed MiniArc to exhibit significant movement in both x- [3.0 ±0.4 mm vs. 2.2 ±0.3 mm (p = 0.02) at rest; 2.6 ±0.3 mm vs. 1.6 ±0.3 mm (p<0.001) during valsalva] and y-axis [3.5 ±0.5 mm vs. 2.0 ±0.3 mm (p<0.001) at rest; 3.3 ±0.5 mm vs. 2.9 ±0.3 mm (p = 0.037) during Valsalva]. The mobility of MiniArc was significantly more than Monarc from rest to Valsalva (1.1 ±0.4 mm vs. 0.3 ±0.3 mm, p = 0.001). Tightness of the sling assessed from the major and minor axis of the urethral core had no significant difference in both groups at rest and during Valsalva. Urethral kinking percentage and the location of the sling did not yield statistical difference.
CONCLUSION: Maintenance of continence rates of mid-urethral slings depends on the compressive effect of the sling on the urethra, urethral kinking, and sling fixation. From 6months to 3 years, MiniArc changed its position in both x- and y-axis over time, which the authors attribute to loosening of the anchoring mechanism since no clinical relevance could be sought.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving 195 women enrolled in a longitudinal cohort study and seen 20 years after an index birth. All had a standardized patient-administered questionnaire, the International Continence Society Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification assessment and 4D translabial ultrasound. Main outcome measures were objective POP clinically and on translabial ultrasound. Postimaging assessment of levator integrity and sonographically determined pelvic organ descent was done blinded against other data.
RESULTS: Of 195 women who were seen a mean of 23 (range, 19.4-46.2) years after their first birth, one declined ultrasound assessment and was excluded, leaving 194. Mean age was 50.2 (range 36.9-66.5) years with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 27.6 (range, 18.3-54.3) kg/m2 . Median parity was 3 (range 1-14). Ninety-one percent (n = 176) had delivered vaginally. Eighteen percent (n = 34) were symptomatic of prolapse. Clinically, 36% (n = 69) had significant POP. Levator avulsion was diagnosed in 16% (n = 31). Mean levator avulsion defect score was 2.2 (range, 0-12). On univariate analysis, levator avulsion and levator avulsion defect score were associated with clinically and sonographically significant POP, that is, odds ratio 2.6 (1.2-5.7), P = .01; and odds ratio 3.3 (1.4-7.7); P = .003, respectively; Ba (P