American journal of surgery · 2003
Comparison of carbon dioxide and iodinated contrast for cavography prior to inferior vena cava filter placement.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Holtzman Robert B, Lottenberg Lawrence, Bass Thomas, Saridakis Angeleke, Bennett Vicki J, Carrillo Eddy H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The use of iodinated contrast in the critically ill trauma patient has been associated with the development of acute renal failure. The low incidence of nephrotoxicity associated with carbon dioxide (CO(2)) makes it an ideal contrast agent for cavography. However, the use of CO(2) has been limited, because reportedly it underestimates the diameter of the inferior vena cava (IVC).
METHODS: During a 6-month period (January 2000 through June 2000), 25 adult trauma patients required IVC filter placement. Bedside cavagrams using CO(2) followed by iodinated contrast were employed to determine the diameter of the IVC and the anatomy of the renal veins.
RESULTS: Using CO(2) injection for cavography, we were able to determine the diameter of the IVC and the anatomy of the renal veins in all patients. Furthermore, when CO(2) cavography was compared with the results obtained with iodinated contrast, the difference in diameter of the IVC was within 1 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these data, it was determined that CO(2) cavagrams accurately reflect the diameter of the IVC and the anatomy of the renal veins. Additionally, CO(2) cavagrams can be safely performed in the intensive care unit during bedside placement of IVC filters.
METHODS: During a 6-month period (January 2000 through June 2000), 25 adult trauma patients required IVC filter placement. Bedside cavagrams using CO(2) followed by iodinated contrast were employed to determine the diameter of the IVC and the anatomy of the renal veins.
RESULTS: Using CO(2) injection for cavography, we were able to determine the diameter of the IVC and the anatomy of the renal veins in all patients. Furthermore, when CO(2) cavography was compared with the results obtained with iodinated contrast, the difference in diameter of the IVC was within 1 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these data, it was determined that CO(2) cavagrams accurately reflect the diameter of the IVC and the anatomy of the renal veins. Additionally, CO(2) cavagrams can be safely performed in the intensive care unit during bedside placement of IVC filters.