RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 1998
[The significance of magnetic resonance venography in the pre-interventional clarification of a malignant superior venous obstruction].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Müller M F, Triller J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Comparison between peripheral digital subtraction venography (DSV) and magnetic resonance venography (MRV) in planning for stent placement in malignant superior central venous obstruction.
METHOD: 19 patients with malignant central vein obstruction were examined by DSV (n = 19) and MRV (n = 19). For each patient 12 segment-vessel evaluation was performed to review for obstruction and then compared with the gold standard--selective catheter phlebography--performed at the time of stent insertion. Additionally, tumor extension and collateral venous outflow was noted.
RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy amounted to 92%, 96%, and 95% for DSV and 98%, 100%, and 100%, respectively for MRV. The McNemar test revealed a significance between MR venography and DSV.
CONCLUSIONS: With regard to planning of stent placement, a more exact evaluation was possible with MR venography than with DSV. Thus, MR venography can replace DSV as the method of choice for clarifying malignant superior central vein obstructions prior to stent placement.
METHOD: 19 patients with malignant central vein obstruction were examined by DSV (n = 19) and MRV (n = 19). For each patient 12 segment-vessel evaluation was performed to review for obstruction and then compared with the gold standard--selective catheter phlebography--performed at the time of stent insertion. Additionally, tumor extension and collateral venous outflow was noted.
RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy amounted to 92%, 96%, and 95% for DSV and 98%, 100%, and 100%, respectively for MRV. The McNemar test revealed a significance between MR venography and DSV.
CONCLUSIONS: With regard to planning of stent placement, a more exact evaluation was possible with MR venography than with DSV. Thus, MR venography can replace DSV as the method of choice for clarifying malignant superior central vein obstructions prior to stent placement.