PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J H Gustafsen

Publications and source records attributed to J H Gustafsen.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

[Hemorrhagic diarrhea with competing etiologies].

A case history of a 41-year-old woman with bloody diarrhoea is described. A right-sided hemicolectomy was performed and histological findings showed pseudomembranous colitis. The woman was infected with verotoxin-producing E. coli O103:H2. She had taken an overdose of ergotamine and was using a contraceptive containing oestrogen. Each of these have previously been described as being the cause of bloody diarrhoea, but we suggest the combination as the aetiology in the present case.

Adult↗

[Hydatidosis. A survey].

With the increased influx of foreign workers, refugees and immigrants, particularly from endemic areas, we will probably see more patients with hydatid disease, chiefly hydatid disease of the liver caused by E. granulosus. Thus it is important to bring the disease to the attention of the general surgeon. The diagnosis of hydatid disease is primarily made by ultrasound and serological examination. Other tests such as CT, angiography and ERCP are as a rule only important in surgical planning and in complicated cases. Treatment is principally surgical. The choice of surgical procedure should be individualized as much as possible due to the many aspects of the disease. Drainage of residual cavities should be avoided. Preoperative evaluation by ERCP is indicated in cases complicated by biliary communication. Percutaneous drainage can be indicated in cases of recurrence and in cysts of poor accessability. Medical treatment has its place primarily pre- and postoperatively. The preferred drug is albendazole. Mebendazole is now considered obsolete. It is not possible to monitor the effect of treatment with current serological methods.

Data Collection↗

[The reliability of fiber endoscopic estimation of the size of gastroduodenal ulcer].

The areas of 22 regions in a gastro-duodenal model were estimated endoscopically by 11 examiners. The procedure was then repeated with a biopsy forceps as the reference for measurement. Without the biopsy forceps, 86% of the areas were underestimated. Measurement with the biopsy forceps reduced the deviations of the estimates and the scatter of these but 75% were still underestimated. The estimates showed considerable inter-observer variation and limited reproducibility. Endoscopically estimated alteration in area of an ulcer should not be accepted as clinical documentation for healing.

Duodenal Ulcer↗