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 Seltzer, S.
Right arrow Articles by DeWeese, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Seltzer, S.
Right arrow Articles by DeWeese, 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 137, Issue 5, 1011-1014
Copyright © 1981 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Traumatic aortic rupture: plain radiographic findings

SE Seltzer, C D'Orsi, R Kirshner, and JA DeWeese

The plain radiographic findings on 20 patients with traumatic aortic rupture were analyzed. A mediastinal-width to chest-width (M/C) ratio was calculated at three thoracic levels and compared to two matched groups of patients without aortic tears. Defining an M/C ratio of 0.25 or larger at the level of the aortic arch as abnormal would identify 95% of cases with ruptured aortas, and result in 25% false-positive studies in traumatized patients. A ratio greater than 0.28 retains 85% sensitivity for aortic rupture while increasing specificity to 100%. An analysis of the prevalence and location of rib fractures showed that there was little relation between the presence of fracture and existence of an aortic tear. Therefore, an acutely injured patient with an M/C ratio of greater than 0.25 should be considered highly likely to have an aortic rupture.
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
Emerg. Med. J.Home page
C E O'Conor
Diagnosing traumatic rupture of the thoracic aorta in the emergency department
Emerg. Med. J., July 1, 2004; 21(4): 414 - 419.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Emerg. Med. J.Home page
C E Gleeson, R L Spedding, L A Harding, and M Caplan
The mediastinum--Is it wide?
Emerg. Med. J., May 1, 2001; 18(3): 183 - 185.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. C. Blackmore, A. Zweibel, and F. A. Mann
Determining Risk of Traumatic Aortic Injury: How to Optimize Imaging Strategy
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2000; 174(2): 343 - 347.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
VASC ENDOVASCULAR SURGHome page
F. Pinterits, F. Grabenwoeger, W. Dock, V. Metz, and W. Appel
Chest Radiograph in the Acute Traumatic Rupture of the Aorta
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, March 1, 1989; 23(2): 122 - 127.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1981 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.