Citations

Key PointsThe loss of the two most abundant eosinophil granule proteins disrupts the production of blood eosinophils from marrow progenitors. Knockout animals deficient for both MBP-1 and EPX represent a novel strain of mice with a specific and congenital loss of eosinophils.

Object Surgeon and operating room (OR) staff radiation exposure during spinal surgery is a concern, especially with the increasing use of multiplanar fluoroscopy in minimally invasive spinal surgery procedures. Cone beam computed tomography (cbCT)–based, 3D image guidance does not involve the use of active fluoroscopy during instrumentation placement and therefore decreases radiation exposure for the surgeon and OR staff during spinal fusion procedures. However, the radiation scatter of a cbCT device can be similar to that of a standard 64-slice CT scanner and thus could expose the surgeon and OR staff to radiation during image acquisition. The purpose of the present study was to measure radiation exposure at several unshielded locations in the OR when using cbCT in conjunction with 3D image-guided spinal surgery in 25 spinal surgery cases. Methods Five unshielded badge dosimeters were placed at set locations in the OR during 25 spinal surgery cases in which cbCT-based, 3D image guidance was used. The cbCT device (O-ARM) was used in conjunction with the Stealth S7 image-guided platform. The radiology department analyzed the badge dosimeters after completion of the last case. Results Fifty high-definition O-ARM spins were performed in 25 patients for spinal registration and to check instrumentation placement. Image-guided placement of 124 screws from C-2 to the ileum was accomplished without complication. Badge dosimetry analysis revealed minimal radiation exposure for the badges 6 feet from the gantry in the area of the anesthesiology equipment, as well as for the badges located 10–13 feet from the gantry on each side of the room (mean 0.7–3.6 mrem/spin). The greatest radiation exposure occurred on the badge attached to the OR table within the gantry (mean 176.9 mrem/spin), as well as on the control panel adjacent to the gantry (mean 128.0 mrem/spin). Conclusions Radiation scatter from the O-ARM was minimal at various distances outside of and not adjacent to the gantry. Although the average radiation exposure at these locations was low, an earlier study, undertaken in a similar fashion, revealed no radiation exposure when the surgeon stood behind a lead shield. This simple precaution can eliminate the small amount of radiation exposure to OR staff in cases in which the O-ARM is used.

Prostatic stromal hyperplasia with atypia (PSHA) is a rare histologic finding diagnosed incidentally on prostate biopsies, transurethral resection specimens, and radical prostatectomy specimens. PSHA has a bizarre histologic appearance and these lesions often raise concern for sarcoma; however, their clinical course is indolent and does not include extraprostatic progression. We discuss a case of PHSA discovered on prostate biopsy performed for an abnormal digital rectal examination and review the literature on this rare pathologic finding.

Pulmonary fibrosis in surgical lung biopsies is said to have a ‘usual interstitial pneumonia- pattern ’ (UIP- pattern ) of disease when scarring of the parenchyma is present in a patchy, ‘temporally heterogeneous’ distribution. These biopsies are one of the more common non-neoplastic specimens surgical pathologists encounter and often pose a number of challenges. UIP is the expected histopathological pattern in patients with clinical idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), but the UIP- pattern can be seen in other conditions on occasion. Most important among these are the rheumatic interstitial lung diseases (RILD) and chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (CHrHP). Because theses entities have different mechanisms of injury, approach to therapy, and expected clinical progression, it is imperative for the surgical pathologist to correctly classify them. Taken in isolation, the UIP- pattern seen in patients with IPF may appear to overlap with that of RILD and CHrHP, at least when using the broadest definition of this term (patchy fibrosis). However, important distinguishing features are nearly always present in our experience, and the addition of a multidisciplinary approach will often resolve the critical differences between these diseases. In this manuscript, we review the distinguishing clinical, radiologic and histopathological features of UIP of IPF, RILD and CHrHP, based, in part, on the existing literature, but also lessons learned from a busy lung biopsy consultation practice.

Summary The defining characteristic of a profession – and especially a health‐care profession – is that the behaviour of its members is proscribed by a formal code of ethics. The main purpose of such codes is to guide practitioners' interactions with patients, assuring that patient interests are protected. In other words, the ethical code requires practitioners to place their patients' needs for proper diagnosis and appropriate treatment ahead of their own needs for income and advancement. The dental profession has a code of ethics that was developed by the American Dental Association many years ago; in most clinical situations, determination of proper behaviour is self‐evident. However, the field of temporoman‐dibular disorders ( TMD s) has been the subject of considerable controversy for over half a century, and many people have argued that this makes it impossible to evaluate various approaches to treatment of TMD s within an ethical framework. In this article, the authors argue that the large volume of scientific evidence in the contemporary TMD literature provides an ethical framework for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with TMD s within a biopsychosocial medical model. They present a summary of the research with contemporary scientific integrity, which has produced that information over a period of many years. Based on that research, they conclude that dentists may provide conservative and reversible treatments that will be successful for most TMD s and in doing so will comply with the profession's code of ethics. Conversely, the authors claim that those dentists who continue to follow the older mechanistic models of TMD aetiology and treatment are not only out of step scientifically, but are placing their patients' welfare at risk by providing unnecessary irreversible bite‐changing and jaw‐repositioning interventions. Therefore, debate of these issues should not be solely focused on scientific merit, but also upon the compelling ethical obligations that dentists have as a result of the contemporary scientific literature regarding TMD s.