No abstract available.

No abstract available.
Heart Septal Defects, Ventricular*

No abstract available.
Coronary Artery Disease* ; Coronary Vessels* ; Humans ; Mass Screening*

No abstract available.
Subclavian Artery* ; Thoracic Outlet Syndrome* ; Thromboembolism*

No abstract available.
Esophageal Neoplasms*

The present study was carried out to investigate the relationships between the depth of overbite and the masseteric silent period Normal subjects of 44 were selected, which consisted of 9 open bites, 24 normal overbites and 11 deep bites, all were 19-29 years of age EMG activity was recorded on the bilateral masseteric muscles and craniofacial radiography was done. The following results were obtained 1. The mean duration of masseteric silent period was 18.58+/-4.50 msec in open bite, 17.37+/-7.05 msec in normal overbite and 19.30+/-7.62 msec in deep bite groups. 2. There were no significant differences on masseteric silent period among open bite, normal overbite and deep bite groups. 3. There were no significant correlations between masseteric silent period and craniofacial variables.
Muscles ; Open Bite* ; Overbite* ; Radiography

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is often associated with extrahepatic autoimmune disease, and autoantibodies such as anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) or anti-smooth muscle antibody (ASA). The presence of autoantibodies may make discrimination between chronic hepatitis C with autoimmune features and type 1 autoimmune hepatitis difficult. We studied the prevalence of autoantibodies in patients with chronic HCV infection and their clinical significance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ANA, ASA, anti-mitochondrial antibody (AMA), anti-microsomal antibody (AmA), rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-cardiolipin antibody (aCL) and lupus anti-coagulant (LA) were tested in 116 patients (80 chronic hepatitis C, 36 liver cirrhosis). Genotypes of HCV were determined in 25 patients by INNO LiPA. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of autoantibody was 65.5%. The most common autoantibody was aCL (34.5%), followed by ANA (25%), RF (18%), LA (15.5%), ASA (6.9%), anti-microsomal antibody (6%) and AMA (1%). The positive rate of either ANA or ASA was 30.2%, but both were positive in 1.7% only. There was no difference in the demographic features, biochemistry, HCV genotypes and disease status between autoantibody-positive and autoantibody-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: Autoantibodies were commonly found in patients with chronic HCV infection. But, the presence of autoantibodies may be a non-specific finding in chronic hepatitis C infection without clinical significance.
Autoantibodies* ; Autoimmune Diseases ; Biochemistry ; Discrimination (Psychology) ; Genotype ; Hepacivirus ; Hepatitis C, Chronic* ; Hepatitis, Autoimmune ; Hepatitis, Chronic* ; Humans ; Liver ; Prevalence* ; Rheumatoid Factor

No abstract available.
Drug Therapy* ; Pancreas* ; Pancreatic Neoplasms*

Osteoid osteoma is a distinctive benign lesion characterized by a less then 2 cm, pea-like mass of abnormal bone (nidus). The common sites of osteoid osteoma are femur, tibia, humerus, spine and talus. Mastoid tip, clavicle, acetabulum, coccyx, rib, hamate, scapula and scaphoid are rare sites of osteoid osteoma. Osteoid osteoma of the patella is also very rare and on review of literatures we could find only one reported case which was treated by surgical excision. We also experienced one case of osteoid osteoma located at the patella, so we report this case with review of literatures.
Acetabulum ; Clavicle ; Coccyx ; Femur ; Humerus ; Mastoid ; Osteoma, Osteoid* ; Patella* ; Ribs ; Scapula ; Spine ; Talus ; Tibia

The tibiofemoral angle is widely used for the diagnosis and treatment of knee problems, especially in degenerative joint disease of the knee. Among the various methods of measurement of tibiofemoral angle, Bauers method is being used most frequently. But measurement by Bauers method has seemed to show wide individual differences. Therefore we designed a ruler which can be used very easily for the measurement of the tibiofemoral angle with little differences between persons who measure the angle. To testify the advantages of our method, we selected 4 orthopedic surgeons and let them measure the tibiofemoral angles of 60 knees of 30 patients by Bauers method and by our method using the ruler. And 20 orthopedic surgeons measured tibiofemoval angles of 2 left knees by Bauers method and by our method using the ruler. The values of the tibiofemoral angle by two methods were compared and analyzed statistically. There was no significant differences between mean values. But, the tibiofemoral angles by our new method showed little differences among measurers. (P < 0.05)
Diagnosis ; Humans ; Individuality ; Joint Diseases ; Knee ; Linear Energy Transfer ; Methods ; Orthopedics ; Surgeons