We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Angiographic detection of gastrointestinal bleeding. An experimental comparison of conventional screen-film angiography and digital subtraction angiography.
Investigative Radiology 1996 July
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The authors experimentally assess and compare the detection limit of gastrointestinal bleeding in digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and conventional screen-film angiography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Arterial blood flow was simulated using a tube model in which bleeding was imitated by exudation of liquid containing contrast material. Gut peristalsis was imitated using silicone tubes filled with air and liquid. Images were acquired by DSA and conventional screen-film angiography. The iodine concentration was increased in increments from 1 mg I/mL, with and without simulated peristalsis, and with both free and circumscribed extravasation of contrast material.
RESULTS: The detection limit for free extravasation in DSA was 1 mg I/mL without peristalsis and 60 mg I/mL with peristalsis. The corresponding figures for circumscribed extravasation were 1 mg I/mL and 34 mg I/mL. The detection limit for free extravasation in screen-film angiography was 172 mg I/mL both with and without simulated peristalsis. Circumscribed extravasation was detected at 9 mg I/mL without peristalsis and 7 mg I/mL with peristalsis.
CONCLUSION: Digital subtraction angiography is the more sensitive angiographic technique for detection of gastrointestinal bleeding and is superior to conventional screen-film angiography, provided that it is performed with adequate parasym-pathicolysis and suspended respiration. Only when these requirements cannot be achieved is screen-film angiography advantageous.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Arterial blood flow was simulated using a tube model in which bleeding was imitated by exudation of liquid containing contrast material. Gut peristalsis was imitated using silicone tubes filled with air and liquid. Images were acquired by DSA and conventional screen-film angiography. The iodine concentration was increased in increments from 1 mg I/mL, with and without simulated peristalsis, and with both free and circumscribed extravasation of contrast material.
RESULTS: The detection limit for free extravasation in DSA was 1 mg I/mL without peristalsis and 60 mg I/mL with peristalsis. The corresponding figures for circumscribed extravasation were 1 mg I/mL and 34 mg I/mL. The detection limit for free extravasation in screen-film angiography was 172 mg I/mL both with and without simulated peristalsis. Circumscribed extravasation was detected at 9 mg I/mL without peristalsis and 7 mg I/mL with peristalsis.
CONCLUSION: Digital subtraction angiography is the more sensitive angiographic technique for detection of gastrointestinal bleeding and is superior to conventional screen-film angiography, provided that it is performed with adequate parasym-pathicolysis and suspended respiration. Only when these requirements cannot be achieved is screen-film angiography advantageous.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app