1,720,963 research outputs found
Multidetector row computed tomographic angiography of the abdominal aorta and lower limbs arteries.
No full textMultidetector row computed tomographic angiography of the abdominal aorta and lower limbs arteries. A new diagnostic tool in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease.
No full textThe aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of multidetector row CT angiography (MDCTA) of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities arteries in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease who did not receive any prior treatment whether interventional or surgical. Twenty-two patients with peripheral vascular occlusive disease (16 male, 6 female, age range 44-85 years) underwent MDCTA of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) of the same districts was performed within 3 months. Images were blindly interpreted by 2 interventional radiologists and compared with the results of digital subtraction angiography. Sensitivity and specificity of MDCTA were 92% and 94%, respectively, with positive and negative predictive values of 93% and 95%. Overall diagnostic accuracy was 93%. Normal arterial segments and 100% occlusions were correctly identified in all cases by MDCTA. Moderately stenotic segments interpretation in the calves appeared to be more controversial, but no statistical difference in accuracy in this district was noted with respect to accuracy in more proximal arteries. MDCTA of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities is a feasible, accurate imaging modality in clinical practice when compared to DSA
Follow-up of patients with previous vascular interventions: role of multidetector row computed tomographic angiography of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities
No full textMultidetector row CT angiography of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease: diagnostic accuracy and interobserver agreement
No full textPurpose: To evaluate the accuracy of four channel multidetector row CT angiography (MDCTA) of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities arteries compared with digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Materials and methods: In our prospective study 42 patients with peripheral vascular occlusive disease (27 M. 15 F, age range 40-79 years) underwent MDCTA and DSA within 5 days. Images were blindly interpreted by two radiologists. Maximum intensity projections (MIP), multiplanar (MPR) reformations, three-dimensional (3D) reconstructions as well as axial images were available for analysis of MDCTA. DSA were analyzed on hard copies. Results: Overall sensitivity and specificity of MDCTA were 93 and 95%. respectively, with positive and negative predictive values of 90 and 97%. Overall diagnostic accuracy was 94%. Normal arterial segments and 100% occlusions were correctly identified in all cases by MDCTA. Moderately stenotic segments interpretation in the calves appeared to be more controversial, but no statistical difference in accuracy of MDCTA in the infrapopliteal district arteries was noted with respect to accuracy in the more proximal arterial bed. Good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver agreement were observed, with k values greater than 0.80. Conclusions: MDCTA of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities is an accurate imaging modality in clinical practice when compared with DSA. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved
The Early Effects of Intravenous L-propionyl Carnitine On Ulcerative Trophic Lesions of the Lower-limbs In Arteriopathic Patients - A Controlled Randomized Study
No full textLarge numbers of patients with severe peripheral arteriopathic disorders (Stage IV) present a characteristic clinical history of pain and ulcerative trophic lesions requiring either major or minor amputation. Recent studies have shown that L-propionyl-carnitine (LPC) can possibly moderate the tissue damage induced by ischaemia in peripheral arteriopathic disorders, in the present study 12 patients with severe obstructive chronic arteriopathy were treated either with 2g of LPC (plus heparin and buflomedil) by slow infusion b.i.d, or by placebo plus heparin and buflomedil, in the LPC-treated patients, one lesion was completely healed (17%); two showed a >50% decrease in the surface of the ulcerative lesion (34%) and three a reduction in such surface <50% (50%). Control patients showed a reduction <50% of the ulcerative lesions in two cases (34%), unaltered limits of the ulcer margin in three cases (50%) and worsening of such a lesion in one case. in addition, the LPC-treated patients showed a progressive reduction in the evening pain symptom as monitored by the fewer requested doses of the analgesic compound ketoprofen (77 vs 125 requests for administration in treated and control patients, respectively). The long-term effect of LPC treatment evaluated after three months showed that in treated patients only one minor (digital) amputation was performed, whereas in the control group two patients underwent minor (digital and foot) and one major (above knee) amputations, in conclusion the results of the present preliminary study suggest that LPC administration can improve the healing of ulcerative lesions, can reduce the need for analgesic medication and can lessen the incidence of amputation
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
