RESUMEN
Three cases of localized skin reaction in the first month after implantation of the Norplant contraceptive resulted in a partial implant expulsion and removal in one patient, and implant removal in another. Clinical evidence of infection was absent in all patients. While lidocaine with epinephrine was used in all three patients, the cause for these skin reactions remains unclear. Physicians should be alerted to the possibility of significant skin reactions associated with this procedure.
Asunto(s)
Vesícula/etiología , Levonorgestrel , Úlcera Cutánea/etiología , Adulto , Anestesia Local/efectos adversos , Vesícula/patología , Implantes de Medicamentos/efectos adversos , Epinefrina/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Levonorgestrel/administración & dosificación , Lidocaína , Métodos , Piel/patología , Úlcera Cutánea/patologíaRESUMEN
Radiographs and CT images taken during oral cholecystography in dogs were interpreted in an independent, blind fashion by three radiologists on two occasions and visual assessment of gallbladder density compared to the actual CT values. While there was significant intra- and inter-observer variation, the mean scores for the observers' interpretations of both radiographs and prints correlated well with the actual CT values (p less than 0.05). In five out of six comparisons between first and second readings, the observers gave a lower score on the second reading. The considerable variation reflects the problems inherent in subjective evaluation of agents that produce small but measurable differences in radiographic density. Studies involving such subjective data have to be carefully designed in order to obtain meaningful results.