Does anyone know where I can get updates for Step UP? A lot of the information seems outdated and there are lots of typos, I want a nice simple errata page where I can find out what's currently correct.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Has anyone compared the 2004 vs 2008 edition? Is tit worth getting the new edition?
It's not a lot, but when I went thorugh it the first time during medicine I kept on finding errors with otherbooks/pubmed/cecils. Really bugged me.
But I guess there arent enough to start a thread, thanks anyways.
I think we are going to have to make our own. Here is what I have found so far. If anyone else has some others that we've missed, it would be awesome if you'd add them.Does anyone know where I can get updates for Step UP? A lot of the information seems outdated and there are lots of typos, I want a nice simple errata page where I can find out what's currently correct.
I think we are going to have to make our own. Here is what I have found so far. If anyone else has some others that we've missed, it would be awesome if you'd add them.
-p. 69: Table 2-3 at the bottom of the page has two problems: First, it blurs mild persistent asthma with intermittent asthma. Mild intermittent asthma should have symptoms 2 or *fewer* times per week, not two or more times. Second, it leaves out mild persistent asthma as a category. Mild persistent asthma has symptoms more than 2x/week but not every day (which would be moderate persistent asthma). Treat mild persistent asthma w/ a low dose inhaled steroid. The chart is correct that mild intermittent asthma does not require any control medication.
-p. 73: This is another omission. Under section C (Diagnosis), add a point #7 for PET/SPECT as a method of detecting lung cancer. PET scanning uses fluorodeoxyglucose; this is effective b/c tumor cells take up and metabolize more glucose than normal parenchyma does. SPECT is a related technique that uses a radioactive isotope (technetium-99), which again is selectively taken up by the tumor cells and allows visualization of the tumor.
-p. 105: This is another omission. Under part b ("other causes include") at the top of the page, "Bleeding disorder (ex. hemophilia)" should be added to the differential for hemoptysis.
-p. 115: Typo at the bottom of the page. It should say, "Diet: limit protein to 30 to 40 *grams* per day", not milligrams!
-p. 137: Under point 2 (Lower GI bleeding), point a should say that diverticulosis is the most common source of GI bleeding in patients *over* age 60, not under. Point b underneath that one should say that angiodysplasia is the *second* most common source of bleeding in patients over age 60.
-p. 162: Typo under the section Thyroid Nodules, part A (General Characteristics). The second sentence in point 2 should say that multinodular conditions may be *misleading*, not leading.
-p. 163: Typo in box 4-5 at the bottom of the page. Under the heading Cold Nodules, the first point should read *Decreased* iodine uptake = hypofunctioning nodule, not increased.
-p. 170: Typo in the last sentence under Diagnosis, point #2 (Water Load Test). It should say that if a large amount of water is excreted in the urine (>65% in four hours), consider SIADH an *unlikely* diagnosis, not a likely one. A normal person should excrete >65% of a water load within four hours (or >80% in 5 hours). One source I checked stated that SIADH pts often only excrete <40% of the water load after five hours.
-p. 175: This is the error that Ashers found. Under Section D (Treatment), point 2 should say that medical treatment consists of *alpha* blockers (phenoxybenzamine), not beta blockers. (Just FYI, beta blockers can be added afterward if needed, but they should not be used first to avoid precipitating a hypertensive crisis due to unopposed stimulation of alpha receptors.)
-p. 181: Typo at the bottom under point b (Regimens), second point. The part in parentheses at the end should say that "one-half to two-thirds of this dose will be NPH and one-third to one-*half* regular", not one-third to one-third.
-p. 185: Typo in the margin under "definition of microalbuminuria." The second line should read, "20 to 200 *micrograms* per minute", not grams. (I did the conversion, and 20-200 ug/min does come out to be about 30-300 mg/day.)
-p. 185: The chart of diabetes drugs at the bottom of the page omits two new and important classes of drugs: DPP-IV inhibitors (sitagliptin), and incretin mimetics (exenatide). The DPP-IV inhibitors inhibit the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase IV, which breaks down the incretins (GLP-1 and GIP). Incretin mimetics stimulate insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent fashion and also inhibit glucagon secretion.
-p. 318: This is the mistake that laxman found. At the very bottom of the page under Section C (Diagnosis), cross out the part in parentheses that says, "See color figure 9-1". This figure is correctly cited at the bottom of p. 321 as a picture of a hypersegmented neutrophil.
-p. 411: The authors seem to have a real issue with confusing alpha and beta blockers! Point b at the top of the page is labeled beta blockers, and that is correct. Point f, on the other hand, should be labeled *alpha* blockers, not beta blockers. While you're correcting this page anyway, I would also add that beta blockers are thought to decrease sympathetic outflow (in addition to decreasing HR and CO). Alpha blockers also relax vascular smooth muscle (as well as decreasing arteriolar resistance).
Hey, good catch. I didn't see that one. Adding to the master list.Hey I just wanted to say thanks, this is very helpful Q.
Edit: also...p.183, Figure 4-6: Pretty sure the 3rd level of the flow chart is supposed to read "70% NPH (2/3)....30% regular (1/3)" on both limbs of the insulin dosing schematic, not "NPH" all the way across.
Good catch; I totally missed both of those. Adding to the master list.One more, page 177, Adrenal Insufficiency point B (Clinical features) letter d should read HYPOTENSION not HTN. Same thing across from it under quick-hit should read postural hypotension not HTN. Keep editing QofQuimica, good job
You must have the old edition. In my edition, which is the 2nd ed., there is a table of extra-articular manifestations of RA on page 246. The first point in the third box for pulmonary symptoms says in bold type, "Pleural fluid characteristically has very low glucose..."Ugh, I lent my step up out to someone, but I kept making notes in the margins about ridiculously wrong stuff. One of them I got burned about during rounds, and my attending actually accused me of using Step Up (how did she know?!) because it was wrong -- pleural fluid glucopenia => rheumatoid arthritis. Step Up lists it as HIGH glucose. Can someone find the page reference for me and put it down?
Incidentally, why is this? High glucose utilization during inflammation?
You must have the old edition. In my edition, which is the 2nd ed., there is a table of extra-articular manifestations of RA on page 246. The first point in the third box for pulmonary symptoms says in bold type, "Pleural fluid characteristically has very low glucose..."
Yeah, you're right, at least for men. For women, the AHA site says that <50 HDL is a risk factor. The part about HDL >60 being a negative risk factor is correct.P. 413 6 c third bullet HDL value should be <40 (rather than <35). At least according to AHA/ATPIII criteria
Great catch!!! You are absolutely right, indomethacin is used most commonly, but ibuprofen and ASA are just as good. Steroids are the 2nd choice. Colchicine added in pts with 1st attack of viral or idiopathic pericarditis as it decreases recurrence rate from 32 to 11 percentSays treatment consists of Aspirin
Then points out that NSAIDs and steroids are contraindicated...checked some sources and it points out NSAIDs/Aspirin are treatment of choice. Steroids are not first line, however, if unsuccessful with the NSAIDs steroids may be used. Anyone else agree what they wrote is misleading/wrong?
Sorry...its on page 12
Thanks to you for letting him know, and also to everyone who found errors. There were a bunch that I totally missed and you folks caught. I will update the SDN master list when I get a chance. Still need to read the neuro chapter, so we may yet find a few more.Just wanted to let everyone know, I got in touch with Dr. Agabegi and he is thanking everyone for putting your time into posting your corrections. Next edition will have these corrections in place