[Manifestation of first branchial anomaly:56 cases reportrhinitis].

Objective:To sum up and conclude manifestation of congenital first branchial anomaly(CFBCA).Method:The clinical data of 56 patients from 2005 to 2015 in our hospital were retrospective reviewed.Result:Manifestation:mass without pain(26.8%),repeated sore and discharge(71.4%),otological symptom(external auditory discharge､hearing loss,28.6%).Eleven cases bacterial sample showed positive result,and most of them show pseudomonas aeruginosa and staphylococcus aureus.Auricular endoscopy typically performed stricture of external auditory canal,cholesteatoma samples accumulated in ear canal,fistula at the conjunction of the bone and cartilage and tympanic membranous attachment.Typical performance of CT(MRI)was that there were cystic,lobulated or tubular abnormal shadow related with ear canal in Pochet's triangle area whose cyst wall or pipe wall could been enhanced in enhanced CT(MRI) scans,and part of that could be connected with skin.The statistical difference between type Oslen and Work and clinical characteristics(P<0.01),and the relationship between type Oslen and Work(P<0.01).Most of Work Ⅰ were cyst type,and these two type often had no infected symptom.Most of them were young patients.Most of Work Ⅱ were sinus and fistula type ,and these two type often had infected symptom.Most of them were teenagers.Part of patients of type Work Ⅱ showed tympanic membranous attachment.Conclusion:CFBCA was rare,and it is more common in young patients and often in left part.It always performed as mass without pain､repeated sore and discharge､external auditory discharge.Most of Work Ⅰ were cyst type,and these two type often had no infected symptom and most of them were young patients .Most of Work Ⅱ were sinus and fistula type,and these two type often had infected symptom and most of them were teenagers.Auricular endoscopy,CT,MRI could help make diagnose.Doctors clinical need to differentiate it with related diseases according to different manifestations.

Prevalence of genital human papillomavirus infections established using different diagnostic techniques among males attending a urological clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of different diagnostic methods and their use in estimating the prevalence of genital human papillomavirus (HPV) infections in males attending a urological clinic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study population was derived from a series of 1,153 consecutive males attending a urological clinic in São Paulo between January 1996 and November 1998. Of these 1,153 males, 334 had clinically suspected genital HPV infection and comprised the study cohort. The diagnostic methods used included peniscopy, directed biopsy and HPV detection by means of the Hybrid Capture 2 (HC) assay for both oncogenic and non-oncogenic HPV types. RESULTS: Peniscopy was performed for 297 males, positive results being reported in 237 cases (79.8%). Directed biopsy was performed in 188 males, and histology suggested HPV in 140 of these cases (74.5%). HC confirmed the presence of HPV in only 35.2% of the histologically HPV-suggestive cases. Peniscopy has good sensitivity for identifying male carriers of genital HPV. However, the technique has an inherent low specificity, limiting its usefulness to the correct identification of those who never present with HPV infection. Characteristic histological alterations are useful in suggesting HPV infection, but their correlation with HPV detection using HC is not particularly good. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that both histology and peniscopy have low specificity in detecting male genital HPV. Accurate diagnosis of HPV infection can be confirmed by molecular detection methods only. Histology, however, plays an important role in the differential diagnosis. An appropriate diagnostic protocol for male genital HPV infections in a urological clinic should include peniscopy, histology and molecular diagnostic tools (HC or polymerase chain reaction).