Clinical examination Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2002;24(7):447-452
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032002000700004
Purpose: to compare the size of locally advanced breast tumors through clinical examination, mammography, and ultrasound, and describe the parameters of color Doppler ultrasound evaluated before and after primary chemotherapy. Methods: it was a prospective and descriptive clinical study. Eighteen women with the diagnosis of breast carcinoma, with clinical primary tumors of 50 mm or larger, were submitted to palpation, mammography, ultrasound and color Doppler ultrasound at the moment of diagnosis and after 3 cycles of chemotherapy. The response was considered present when there was a clinical decrease of 50% or more and an ultrasonographic decrease of 25% or more, and absent when there was a clinical decrease less than 50% and ultrasonographic decrease less than 25%. A descriptive statistical analysis and Wilcoxon test were used. Results: regarding the size of the tumors, the method whose results were closer to pathological examination was the clinical examination after chemotherapy, when compared with sizes on ultrasound and mammography. The mammography helped to evaluate 44% of the cases before chemotherapy (8/18). In the cases where the response was absent, the Doppler showed a significant increase of the flow and a decrease of resistance and pulsatility index. In the cases where the response was present (9 cases), the Doppler did not show any significant change regarding the studied parameters. Conclusion: clinical examination was the most efficient method to evaluate the decrease of the volume of tumors submitted to neoadjuvant chemotherapy when compared with ultrasound and mammographic examinations. Doppler showed increase of the flow in the cases of absent response.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2002;24(7):447-452
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032002000700004
Purpose: to compare the size of locally advanced breast tumors through clinical examination, mammography, and ultrasound, and describe the parameters of color Doppler ultrasound evaluated before and after primary chemotherapy. Methods: it was a prospective and descriptive clinical study. Eighteen women with the diagnosis of breast carcinoma, with clinical primary tumors of 50 mm or larger, were submitted to palpation, mammography, ultrasound and color Doppler ultrasound at the moment of diagnosis and after 3 cycles of chemotherapy. The response was considered present when there was a clinical decrease of 50% or more and an ultrasonographic decrease of 25% or more, and absent when there was a clinical decrease less than 50% and ultrasonographic decrease less than 25%. A descriptive statistical analysis and Wilcoxon test were used. Results: regarding the size of the tumors, the method whose results were closer to pathological examination was the clinical examination after chemotherapy, when compared with sizes on ultrasound and mammography. The mammography helped to evaluate 44% of the cases before chemotherapy (8/18). In the cases where the response was absent, the Doppler showed a significant increase of the flow and a decrease of resistance and pulsatility index. In the cases where the response was present (9 cases), the Doppler did not show any significant change regarding the studied parameters. Conclusion: clinical examination was the most efficient method to evaluate the decrease of the volume of tumors submitted to neoadjuvant chemotherapy when compared with ultrasound and mammographic examinations. Doppler showed increase of the flow in the cases of absent response.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2002;24(2):87-91
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032002000200003
Purpose: to analyze the prevalence of urogynecological symptoms and their relationship with final urodynamic diagnosis, and to compare the clinical sign of stress urinary incontinence with urodynamic diagnosis. Methods: a total of 114 patients were included in a retrospective study from June 2000 to January 2001. All patients were evaluated through medical interview, physical examination and urodynamic study. They were classified according to clinical symptom, presence of clinical sign of urine loss and urodynamic study. The data analysis was performed using a test to determine sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: the mean age was 51 years (19-80), 61 patients (53.5%) were in menacme and 53 (46.5%) in postmenopausal stage. Ten (18.8%) were using hormone replacement therapy and 25 (21.9%) had been submitted to surgery for incontinence. The isolated clinical symptom of urine loss was reported in 41 (36.0%) patients, the isolated urgency/urgency-incontinence in 13 (11.4%) and mixed symptoms in 60 (52.6%). In the urodynamic study, of all patients with symptom of isolated urine loss, 34 (83%) had stress urinary incontinence (SUI), no patient had detrusor instability (DI), 2 (4.9%) had mixed incontinence (MI) and 5 (12.1%) had a normal result. Of all patients with isolated urgency/urgency-incontinence, in the urodynamic study, none had SUI, 5 (38.5%) had ID, 1 (7.7%) had MI and 7 (53.8%) had a normal result. Of the patients with mixed symptoms, we identified, on the urodynamic evaluation, 25 (41.6%) who had SUI, 10 (16.7%) ID, 10 (16.7%) MI and 15 (25.0%) a normal result. The clinical sign of urine loss was identified in 50 (43.9%) patients. A total of 35 (70%) had SUI on urodynamic study, 6 (12%) had SUI and another diagnosis and 9 (18%) did not have SUI. Urine loss was absent in 64 (56.1%) women. Of those 23 (35.9%) had SUI on urodynamic study, 7 (11%) had SUI and another diagnosis and 34 (53.1%) did not have SUI. Conclusions: clinical history and physical examination are important in the management of urinary incontinence, although they should not be used as the only diagnostic method. Objective tests are available and should be used together with clinical data.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2002;24(2):87-91
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032002000200003
Purpose: to analyze the prevalence of urogynecological symptoms and their relationship with final urodynamic diagnosis, and to compare the clinical sign of stress urinary incontinence with urodynamic diagnosis. Methods: a total of 114 patients were included in a retrospective study from June 2000 to January 2001. All patients were evaluated through medical interview, physical examination and urodynamic study. They were classified according to clinical symptom, presence of clinical sign of urine loss and urodynamic study. The data analysis was performed using a test to determine sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: the mean age was 51 years (19-80), 61 patients (53.5%) were in menacme and 53 (46.5%) in postmenopausal stage. Ten (18.8%) were using hormone replacement therapy and 25 (21.9%) had been submitted to surgery for incontinence. The isolated clinical symptom of urine loss was reported in 41 (36.0%) patients, the isolated urgency/urgency-incontinence in 13 (11.4%) and mixed symptoms in 60 (52.6%). In the urodynamic study, of all patients with symptom of isolated urine loss, 34 (83%) had stress urinary incontinence (SUI), no patient had detrusor instability (DI), 2 (4.9%) had mixed incontinence (MI) and 5 (12.1%) had a normal result. Of all patients with isolated urgency/urgency-incontinence, in the urodynamic study, none had SUI, 5 (38.5%) had ID, 1 (7.7%) had MI and 7 (53.8%) had a normal result. Of the patients with mixed symptoms, we identified, on the urodynamic evaluation, 25 (41.6%) who had SUI, 10 (16.7%) ID, 10 (16.7%) MI and 15 (25.0%) a normal result. The clinical sign of urine loss was identified in 50 (43.9%) patients. A total of 35 (70%) had SUI on urodynamic study, 6 (12%) had SUI and another diagnosis and 9 (18%) did not have SUI. Urine loss was absent in 64 (56.1%) women. Of those 23 (35.9%) had SUI on urodynamic study, 7 (11%) had SUI and another diagnosis and 34 (53.1%) did not have SUI. Conclusions: clinical history and physical examination are important in the management of urinary incontinence, although they should not be used as the only diagnostic method. Objective tests are available and should be used together with clinical data.