Oral Bisphenol A (BPA) given to rats at moderate doses is associated with erectile dysfunction, cavernosal lipofibrosis and alterations of global gene transcription

Bisphenol A (BPA), a suspected reproductive biohazard and endocrine disruptor, released from plastics is associated with ED in occupationally exposed workers. However, in rats, despite the induction of hypogonadism, apoptosis of the penile corporal smooth muscle (SM), fat infiltration into the cavernosal tissue and changes in global gene expression with the intraperitoneal administration of high dose BPA, ED was not observed. We investigated whether BPA administered orally rather than intraperitoneally to rats for longer periods and lower doses will lead to ED. Main outcome measures are ED, histological, and biochemical markers in rat penile tissues. In all, 2.5-month-old rats were given drinking water daily without and with BPA at 1 and 0.1 mg kg(-1) per day. Two months later, erectile function was determined by cavernosometry and electrical field stimulation (EFS) and serum levels of testosterone (T), estradiol (E2) and BPA were measured. Penile tissue sections were assayed by Masson (SM/collagen), Oil Red O (fat), terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) (apoptosis), immunohistochemistry for Oct4 (stem cells), and α-SM actin/calponin (SM and myofibroblasts), applying quantitative image analysis. Other markers were assayed by western blotting. DNA microarrays/microRNA (miR) assays defined transcription profiles. Orally administered BPA did not affect body weight, but (1) decreased serum T and E2; (2) reduced the EFS response and increased the drop rate; (3) increased within the corporal tissue the presence of fat, myofibroblasts and apoptosis; (4) lowered the contents of SM and stem cells, but not nerve terminals; and (5) caused alterations in the transcriptional profiles for both mRNA and miRs within the penile shaft. Long-term exposure of rats to oral BPA caused a moderate corporal veno-occlusive dysfunction (CVOD), possibly due to alterations within the corporal tissue that pose gene transcriptional changes related to inflammation, fibrosis and epithelial/mesenchymal transition (EMT).

Diagnostic utility of laboratory tests in septic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Septic arthritis remains a challenging diagnosis in which the doctor often relies on laboratory tests.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the diagnostic utility of three ancillary tests--namely, white blood cells (WBC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and the WBC in the joint fluid (jWBC)--using likelihood ratios (LRs) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study at the Jacobi Medical Center. Medical charts of patients who had undergone arthrocentesis were included. Patients who had "dry taps" were excluded from the study. Patients were considered to have septic arthritis if they had a positive arthrocentesis culture or operative findings. The primary outcomes of this study were the sensitivities, specificities, LR(+) and LR(-) values of the laboratory tests for septic arthritis. The performance characteristics of the laboratory tests were analysed using ROC curves.

RESULTS

156 patients were enrolled, 16 (10%) had septic arthritis. The sensitivities for WBC, ESR and jWBC were 0.75, 0.75 and 0.50, and the specificities were 0.55, 0.11 and 0.88, respectively. The LR(+) values were 1.7, 0.84 and 4.0, and the LR(-) values were 0.46, 2.4 and 0.57, respectively. In ROC curve analysis, jWBC was the best test (area under the curve (AUC) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.92), followed by WBC (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.80) and ESR (AUC 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.74). A cut-off of jWBC = 17 500 maximised sensitivity and specificity on the ROC curve.

CONCLUSIONS

jWBC was the best diagnostic test for septic arthritis, WBC and ESR were poor tests. However, no test was diagnostic, and the clinician must be careful with patients with a potential septic joint.

Productivity, quality, and patient satisfaction: comparison of part-time and full-time primary care physicians

CONTEXT

Although few data are available, many believe that part-time primary care physicians (PCPs) are less productive and provide lower quality care than full-time PCPs. Some insurers exclude part-time PCPs from their provider networks.

OBJECTIVE

To compare productivity, quality of preventive care, patient satisfaction, and risk-adjusted resource utilization of part-time and full-time PCPs.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Boston.

PARTICIPANTS

PCPs affiliated with 2 academic outpatient primary care networks.

MEASUREMENTS

PCP productivity, patient satisfaction, resource utilization, and compliance with screening guidelines.

RESULTS

Part-time PCP productivity was greater than that of full-time PCPs (2.1 work relative value units (RVUs)/bookable clinical hour versus 1.3 work RVUs/bookable clinical hour, P< .01). A similar proportion of part-time PCPs (80%) and full-time PCPs (75%) met targets for mammography, Pap smears, and cholesterol screening (P = .67). After adjusting for clinical case mix, practice location, gender, board certification status, and years in practice, resource utilization of part-time PCPs (138 dollars [95% confidence interval (CI), 108 dollars to 167 dollars]) was similar to that of full-time PCPs (139 dollars [95% CI, 108 dollars to 170 dollars], P = .92). Patient satisfaction was similar for part-time and full-time PCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

In these academic primary care practices, rates of patient satisfaction, compliance with screening guidelines, and resource utilization were similar for part-time PCPs compared to full-time PCPs. Productivity per clinical hour was markedly higher for part-time PCPs. Despite study limitations, these data suggest that academic part-time PCPs are at least as efficient as full-time PCPs and that the quality of their work is similar.

MEG and ECoG localization accuracy test

We tested the localization accuracy of magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electrocorticography (ECoG) for a current dipole in a saline filled sphere at depths ranging from 1 to 6 cm at 1 cm intervals. We used standard neuromagnetometer placements and subdural electrode grids, previously employed for patient studies, with precise measurements of sensor and electrode locations with a 3-dimensional spatial digitizer. MEG and ECoG had comparable accuracy with mean errors of 1.5 and 1.8 mm, respectively. It appears that use of the spatial digitizer increases accuracy for both MEG and EGoG localizations. The larger errors in the ECoG with increasing depths could be attributed to under-sampling of the spatial pattern of the field which spreads out with deeper sources. It should be noted that in clinical applications a grid of the dimensions used here would most typically be used for superficial sources on the cortex with depth recordings being preferred for investigations of deep epileptogenic activity. Results are encouraging for continued development of non-invasive MEG methods for further definition of epileptogenic zones in the brain.