PubMed · 2881150
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S J Howell. 1987-03-14. Testing cerebrospinal fluid.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(87)90254-6
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Laboratory examination of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is not available in many parts of the world, and without knowledge of CSF glucose, protein, and cells, a diagnosis of meningitis may be missed. Testing CSF with urine reagent strips that measure glucose and protein has given variable results. We tested CSF samples from 234 children with suspected meningitis for glucose, protein, and leucocytes with Combur9 reagent strips. The results were compared with those obtained from the laboratory and also interpreted as indicating bacterial or viral meningitis. There was good agreement between the strip and laboratory method of estimating CSF glucose, protein, and leucocytes. All but 4 of the cases of meningitis were correctly identified by the strip method (sensitivity 97%). 2 (2.9%) of 69 cases of bacterial meningitis were judged by an independent observer to be viral, and 2 (3.3%) of 60 cases of viral meningitis as normal. No normal CSF was diagnosed as meningitis (specificity 100%). The results indicate that Combur9 reagent strips can distinguish normal from infected CSF and are of value in the diagnosis of meningitis.
We describe a technique to increase the velocity-to-noise ratio (VNR) of phase-contrast magnetic-resonance velocity images based on making three measurements/flow encoding axis rather than the usual two. A phase-aliased high first moment data set and a nonaliased low first moment data set are acquired, and the high-moment data are phase unwrapped using the low-moment data. The VNR of the resulting measurement is given by that of the high-moment measurement and increases linearly with the first moment. A factor of 4 gain in VNR was observed with only a 50% increase in scan time. Thus, this method is a much more efficient way to increase VNR than simple averaging.