Even before behavioral disturbances, neuroleptics, amphetamine, and domperidone application rapidly emerged severe occlusion/occlusion-like syndrome, shared innate vascular and multiorgan failure in rats, comparable to occlusion/occlusion-like syndrome described with vessel(s) occlusion or similar noxious procedures application. As therapy, i.e., activation of the collateral pathways, “bypassing key” (activated azygos vein pathway, direct blood flow delivery), the stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 is a novel solution. Recently, BPC 157 therapy particularly counteracted neuroleptic- or L-NAME-induced catalepsy, lithium intoxication, and schizophrenia positive and negative symptoms (amphetamine/methamphetamine/apomorphine/ketamine). In rats with complete calvariectomy, medication (BPC 157 10 µg/kg, 10 ng/kg ip or ig) was given 5 min after distinctive dopamine agents (mg/kg ip) (haloperidol (5), fluphenazine (5), clozapine (10), risperidone (5), olanzapine (10), quetiapine (10), or aripiprazole (10), domperidone (25), amphetamine (10), and combined amphetamine and haloperidol) and assessed at 15 min thereafter. All neuroleptic-, domperidone-, and amphetamine-induced comparable vascular and multiorgan failure severe syndrome was alleviated with BPC 157 therapy as before major vessel(s) occlusion or other similar noxious procedures. Specifically, all severe lesions in the brain (i.e., immediate swelling, hemorrhage), heart (i.e., congestion, arrhythmias), and lung (i.e., congestion, hemorrhage), as well as congestion in the liver, kidney, and gastrointestinal (stomach) tract, were resolved. Intracranial (superior sagittal sinus), portal, and caval hypertension and aortal hypotension were attenuated or eliminated. BPC 157 therapy almost annihilated arterial and venous thrombosis, peripherally and centrally. Thus, rapidly acting Virchow triad circumstances that occur as dopamine central/peripheral antagonists and agonist essential class-points, fully reversed by BPC 157 therapy, might be overwhelming for both neuroleptics and amphetamine.

Background: This is a novel rat study using native peptide therapy, focused on reversing quadriceps muscle-to-bone detachment to reattachment and stable gastric pentadecapeptide BPC 157 per-oral therapy for shared muscle healing and function restoration. Methods: Pharmacotherapy recovering various muscle, tendon, ligament, and bone lesions, and severed junctions (i.e., myotendinous junction), per-oral in particular (BPC 157/kg/day 10 µg, 10 ng), provides muscle-to-bone reattachment after quadriceps muscle detachment, both complete (rectus muscle) and partial (vastus muscles). Results: Immediately post-injury, and at 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 14, 21, 28, 60, and 90 days post-injury, quadriceps muscle-to-bone detachment showed definitive healing failure (impaired walking and permanent knee flexure). Contrarily, macro/microscopic, ultrasonic, magnetic resonance, biomechanical, and functional assessments revealed that BPC 157 therapy recovering effects for all time points were consistent. All parameters of the walking pattern fully improved, and soon after detachment and therapy application, muscle approached the bone, leaving a minimal gap (on ultrasonic assessment), and leg contracture was annihilated. The healing process occurs immediately after detachment from both sides: the muscle and the bone. The reattachment fibers from the ends of the muscle could be traced into the new bone formed at the surface (note, at day 3 post-detachment, increased mesenchymal cells occurred with periosteum reactivation). Consequently, at 3 months, the form was stable, and the balance between the muscle and bone was the following: well-organized bone, newly formed as more cortical bone providing a narrower bone marrow space, and the muscle and mature fibers were oriented parallel to the bone axis and were in close contact with bone. Conclusions: Therefore, to achieve quadriceps muscle-to-bone reattachment, the BPC 157 therapy reversing course acts from the beginning, resolving an otherwise insurmountable deleterious course.

Background: Although MRI is the most efficient method of detecting breast cancer, its standard protocol is time-consuming and expensive. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the modified innovative abbreviated MRI protocol (AMRP) and the standard magnetic resonance protocol (SMRP) when detecting breast cancer. Methods: The research involved 477 patients referred for breast MRI due to suspected lesions. They were randomly assigned to the AMRP group (N = 232) or the SMRP group (N = 245). The AMRP comprised one native (contrast-free) and four post-contrast dynamic sequences of T1-weighted volume imaging for breast assessment (VIBRANT) and 3d MIP (maximum intensity projection) lasting for eight minutes. All the patients underwent a core biopsy of their lesions and histopathological analysis. Results: The groups were comparable regarding the pre-screening and post-diagnostic characteristics and were of average (±SD) age at breast cancer diagnosis of 53.6 ± 12.7 years. There was no significant difference between the two protocols in terms of specificity or sensitivity of breast cancer diagnosis. The sensitivity (95% Cis) of the AMRP was 99.05% (96.6–99.9%), and its specificity was 59.09% (36.4–79.3%), whereas the sensitivity of the SMRP was 98.12% (95.3–99.5%) and its specificity was 68.75% (50.0–83.9%). Most of the tumors comprised one solid lesion in one of the breasts (77.3%), followed by multicentric tumors (16%), bilateral tumors (4.3%), and multifocal tumors (1.7%). The average size of tumors was approximately 14 mm (ranging from 3 mm to 72 mm). Conclusion: Our innovative AMR protocol showed comparable specificity and sensitivity for the diagnosis of breast cancer when compared to SMRP, which is the “gold standard” for histopathological diagnosis. This can lead to great savings in terms of the time and cost of imaging and interpretation.

To determine patients’ knowledge about ionising radiation used in diagnostic imaging and whether they were adequately informed about the procedure they were referred to. A cross-sectional study was conducted at the University Hospital Merkur, Zagreb, Croatia during 2019–20. A questionnaire with 14 questions was given to patients in waiting rooms for imaging examinations. Statistical analysis was conducted using the standard software package. Chi-square with Yates correction was used to determine differences in patients’ answers between those who received the explanation about the procedure and those who did not. The differences depending on the educational level were also evaluated. The survey was completed by 374 participants (200 women, 174 men) with a mean age of 55.45 ± 15.92 y. Of all patients, 8.63% had no formal education or only finished elementary school, 52.83% had finished high school and 38.55% had a college or a higher degree. The referring physicians informed 63.66% of participants about the radiological exam they were being referred to, and 226 thought that the given explanation was sufficient. Most patients knew that some radiological procedures use ionising radiation. Only 47.37% of respondents correctly identified MRI as a non-ionising method, whereas 37.40% of participants recognised chest X-ray as the modality with the lowest radiation dose. Higher-educated patients had better knowledge of radiological procedures and the potential risks. The study demonstrated suboptimal patients’ knowledge about ionising radiation, and additional efforts in their education are needed.