AJR ARRS Membership
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Brown, T.
Right arrow Articles by Barton, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Brown, T.
Right arrow Articles by Barton, J
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 131, Issue 6, 967-971
Copyright © 1978 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Analysis of ultrasonographic criteria in the evaluation for ectopic pregnancy

TW Brown, RA Filly, FC Laing, and J Barton

To assess the usefulness of ultrasound in diagnosing ectopic pregnancy, the ultrasonographic findings, pregnancy test results, and proven diagnoses in 148 patients referred for evaluation for ectopic pregnancy were reviewed. Of these patients, 33 were subsequently proven to have ectopic gestations. The ultrasonograms were coded for uterine size, intrauterine gestation sac, adnexal mass, adnexal ring, cul-de-sac fluid, or normal findings. With a positive pregnancy test, the presence of an intrauterine gestation sac excludes the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy. Of those patients with positive pregnancy tests and no intrauterine gestation sac, 73% had ectopic pregnancy. All patients with normal ultrasonograms had other diagnoses. With a negative pregnancy test, the intrauterine findings are not helpful, and evaluation of the adnexa is more important. An adnexal ring is a significant, though not absolute, indicator of ectopic pregnancy. A normal scan excludes this diagnosis. Other criteria were not significant. A clinical approach to the evaluation for ectopic pregnancy, based on the data accumulated in this study, is suggested.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
D. M. Sherer, S. A. Smith, T. Allen, and J. R. Woods Jr.
Sonographic Diagnosis of a Viable Ampullary Tubal Pregnancy at 14 Weeks Gestation
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, January 1, 1991; 7(1): 12 - 14.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
T. B. Jones, C. B. Benson, D. H. Saltzman, and M. J. Lavery
Giant Decidual Reaction of Ectopic Pregnancy Simulating a Missed Abortion
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, May 1, 1985; 1(3): 117 - 118.
[PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1978 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.