Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0042373 (vascular disease)
 17,070 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

This study sought to identify any benefit of routine liver function tests (LFTs) in chronically ill, geriatric patients and to assess which patients require evaluation for abnormal LFT levels. A retrospective chart review was carried out on 268 consecutive patients (M:F = 1.2, mean age 77 years, range 61-98 years) presenting for acute care from a long-term care facility. All were without jaundice, right upper quadrant pain, pruritus, bruising, or signs of chronic liver disease. The degree of LFT abnormality (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, or alkaline phosphatase) during admission was compared to the clinical diagnosis at the time of discharge. The most common diagnoses were pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and peripheral or coronary disease in 186 (60%). Thirty-seven patients (14%) had elevated LFT levels on admission. The levels normalized within 2 days in 26 of these patients, 25 of whom had a history of vascular disease (96%). Of the 11 remaining patients, 4 had coexistent vascular disease (36%), and 5 had LFT levels twice normal (none with vascular disease) and underwent abdominal ultrasound. One patient had a common bile duct stone successfully extracted. Enzyme abnormalities were due to hepatitis B or medication use in 10 of 11 patients. No patient had liver biopsy. All but one of the 268 patients were discharged without further evaluation. Over one year of follow up, no patient returned for a liver-related problem. Based on these findings, only those patients with LFT levels that are twice normal and which do not normalize within 2 days warrant further evaluation. Transient LFT abnormalities may be due to decreased liver perfusion.
 ...
PMID:Outcomes of routine testing of liver enzymes in institutionalized geriatric patients. 1016 61

Medical imaging is becoming an increasingly vital component of patient care in the emergency department. Computed tomography has been the diagnostic imaging method of choice for emergency department patients with acute abdominopelvic pain; however, the use of ionizing radiation and the potential need for exogenous contrast material adversely affect patient safety and work flow efficiency, respectively. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging holds promise as an alternative for the evaluation of acute abdominopelvic pain. Critical causes of abdominopelvic pain may be detected with MR imaging without exogenous contrast material. MR imaging is sensitive for depicting tissue or fluid changes related to inflammation, a common process in causes of acute abdominopelvic pain. Fat suppression allows the detection of abnormal signal caused by inflamed tissue. MR imaging has proved sensitive in the detection of acute inflammatory diseases of the gallbladder and bile ducts, liver, pancreas, kidneys, collecting system, bowel, and pelvic soft tissues. Moreover, MR imaging without exogenous contrast material may be safely used in pregnant patients. Evolving roles for emergency department MR imaging include the assessment of vascular disease (including thromboembolic disease) and right upper quadrant pain. Emergency department MR imaging currently has limited availability, and its continued use will require further education regarding operation and image interpretation as well as further validation of cost-effectiveness. Nevertheless, current understanding of the diagnostic utility of this imaging method warrants continued study and the increased use of MR imaging in the evaluation of emergency department patients with acute abdominopelvic pain.
 ...
PMID:MR imaging for acute nontraumatic abdominopelvic pain: rationale and practical considerations. 2360 3