Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) results aren’t improving. What can Radiographers do to improve outcomes with better kidney stone fragmentation?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorHayes, J.M.
dc.contributor.authorKirk, R.
dc.contributor.authorRichardson, A.
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-15T02:16:36Z
dc.date.available2015-09-15T02:16:36Z
dc.date.issued2015en
dc.description.abstractFindings of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) studies of cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Epstein- Barr virus (EBV) and breast cancer vary, making it difficult to determine whether either, both, or neither virus is causally associated with breast cancer. We investigated CMV and EBV in paired samples of breast cancer and normal breast tissue from 70 women using quantitative PCR. A serum sample from each woman was tested for CMV and EBV IgG. To place our results in context, we reviewed the existing literature and performed a meta-analysis of our results together with previous PCR studies of EBV, CMV, and breast cancer. Of the serology samples, 67 of 70 (96%) were EBV IgG positive and 49 of 70 (70%) were CMV IgG positive. QPCR detected EBV in 24 (34%) of the tumour and 9 (13%) of the paired normal specimens and CMV in 0 (0%) of the tumour and 2 (3%) of the paired normal specimens. Our findings, together with earlier results summarised in the meta-analysis, suggest several possibilities: variable findings may be due to limitations of molecular analyses; ‘hit and run’ oncogenesis may lead to inconsistent results; one or both viruses has a role at a later stage in breast cancer development; infection with multiple viruses increases breast cancer risk; or neither virus has a role. Future studies should focus on ways to investigate these possibilities, and should include comparisons of breast cancer tissue samples with appropriate normal tissue samples.en
dc.identifier.citationHayes, J.M., Kirk, R., Richardson, A. (2015) Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) results aren’t improving. What can Radiographers do to improve outcomes with better kidney stone fragmentation?. Vienna, Austria: European Congress of Radiology (ECR 2015), 4-8 Mar 2015.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10092/10887
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherUniversity of Canterbury. School of Health Sciencesen
dc.rights.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10092/17651en
dc.subjectlithotripsyen
dc.subjectfluoroscopyen
dc.subjectkidneyen
dc.subjectabdomenen
dc.subjectcalcificationsen
dc.subjectcalculien
dc.subject.anzsrcFields of Research::32 - Biomedical and clinical sciences::3202 - Clinical sciences::320214 - Nephrology and urologyen
dc.titleShock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) results aren’t improving. What can Radiographers do to improve outcomes with better kidney stone fragmentation?en
dc.typeConference Contributions - Other
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
12652906_ECR2015_C-1094.pdf
Size:
955.9 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
Health: Conference Contributions