<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rdf:RDF
   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
   xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
   xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
   xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
   xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

>
<channel rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/about">
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:08:12 BST</pubDate>


	<title>CiteULike: sjakov Steyn</title>
	<description>CiteULike: sjakov Steyn</description>


	<link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/author/Steyn</link>
	<dc:publisher>CiteULike.org</dc:publisher>
	<dc:language>en-gb</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright &#169; 2004-2008 citeulike.org</dc:rights>
	<items>
    <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/article/2453995"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/article/1505857"/>

	</rdf:Seq>
	</items>
	</channel>


<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/article/2453995">
    <title>Unilateral improvement in glomerular filtration rate after permanent drainage of a perinephric pseudocyst in a cat.</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/article/2453995</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;J Feline Med Surg (5 February 2008)&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A 12-year-old, 6kg, castrated male Siamese-cross cat was referred for investigation of an abdominal mass. The cat was found to have a left perinephric pseudocyst (PNP), accompanied by azotemia, with a small right kidney detected on ultrasound. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was determined by renal scintigraphy and was found to be low, with the left kidney contributing 64% of the total GFR. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided drainage of the PNP did not improve the GFR, and fluid reaccumulated within a short period of time. Laparoscopic fenestration of the cyst capsule was performed to allow for permanent drainage. The PNP did not recur, renal values progressively improved, and 8 months after the capsulotomy the GFR of the left kidney had increased by 50%, while renal function remained static on the right side.</description>
    <dc:title>Unilateral improvement in glomerular filtration rate after permanent drainage of a perinephric pseudocyst in a cat.</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Kelly McCord</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Philip F Steyn</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Katharine F Lunn</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1016/j.jfms.2007.11.002</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>J Feline Med Surg (5 February 2008)</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-01T23:23:46-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2008</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>J Feline Med Surg</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:issn>1098-612X</prism:issn>
    <prism:category>cat</prism:category>
    <prism:category>drainage</prism:category>
    <prism:category>filtration-rate</prism:category>
    <prism:category>glomerular</prism:category>
    <prism:category>perinephric</prism:category>
    <prism:category>permanent</prism:category>
    <prism:category>pseudocyst</prism:category>
    <prism:category>ultrasound</prism:category>
    <prism:category>unilateral</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/article/1505857">
    <title>Accuracy of Radiography, Nuclear Scintigraphy, and Histopathology for Determining the Proximal Extent of Distal Radius Osteosarcoma in Dogs</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/sjakov/article/1505857</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Veterinary Surgery, Vol. 30, No. 3. (2001), pp. 240-245.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Objective- To compare the accuracy of radiography, nuclear scintigraphy, and histopathology for determining the proximal extent of distal radius osteosarcoma in dogs. Study Design- Retrospective clinical study. Sample Population- Twenty client-owned dogs taken to Colorado State University with osteosarcoma of the distal radius. Methods- Medical records of 20 dogs with confirmed osteosarcoma that underwent a limb-salvage procedure were reviewed. Measurements were performed directly from the lateral view of each radius, from both the scintigram and the radiograph, to determine the length of the radius and the distance from the proximal extent of the tumor to the distal radiographic or scintographic extent of the radius. The ratio of distal radial involvement to total radius length was calculated. A similar ratio was also determined using the macroslide, which included the entire portion of bone that was excised during the limb-salvage procedure. All 3 methods of measurement were compared. Results- Nuclear scintigraphy significantly overestimated tumor length when compared with macroslide specimen measurements. Radiography also overestimated tumor length, but these results were not significantly different from macroslide specimen measurements. Conclusions- Both radiography and nuclear scintigraphy overestimate the extent of distal radiaus osteosarcoma in dogs when compared with histopathologic macroslides of the same lesions. Nuclear scintigraphy overestimated tumor extent to a larger degree than did radiography. Clinical Relevance- Although radiography is a more accurate method of measurement of the extent of distal radius osteosarcoma, because nuclear scintigraphy overestimates tumor length to a greater degree, scintigraphy may provide a larger margin of safety for determining the site of proximal osteotomy during a limb-salvage procedure. However, caution should be taken when utilizing scintigraphy, because this method may overestimate length of radius involved to such an extent as to cause the surgeon to believe that a patient is not a suitable limb-salvage candidate. cCopyright 2001 by The American College of Veterinary Surgeons</description>
    <dc:title>Accuracy of Radiography, Nuclear Scintigraphy, and Histopathology for Determining the Proximal Extent of Distal Radius Osteosarcoma in Dogs</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Nicole Leibman</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Charles Kuntz</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Phillip Steyn</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Martin Fettman</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Barbara Powers</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Stephen Withrow</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>William Dernell</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1053/jvet.2001.23351</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Veterinary Surgery, Vol. 30, No. 3. (2001), pp. 240-245.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2007-07-26T22:22:26-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2001</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Veterinary Surgery</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>30</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>3</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>240</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>245</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>accuracy</prism:category>
    <prism:category>cancer</prism:category>
    <prism:category>dog</prism:category>
    <prism:category>histopathology</prism:category>
    <prism:category>radiography</prism:category>
    <prism:category>radius</prism:category>
    <prism:category>scintigraphy</prism:category>
</item>



</rdf:RDF>

