AJR Women's Imaging Online
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 Mark, A.
Right arrow Articles by Price, D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mark, A.
Right arrow Articles by Price, D
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 144, Issue 2, 315-318
Copyright © 1985 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Detection of abdominal aortic graft infection: comparison of CT and in-labeled white blood cell scans

AS Mark, SM McCarthy, AA Moss, and D Price

Aortic graft infections are a rare but potentially lethal complication of aortic graft surgery. If the infection is limited to the groin, local therapy and preservation of the graft may be possible in some cases, whereas infections extending into the retroperitoneum require removal of the graft and revascularization of the lower limbs. The diagnosis and assessment of the extent of a graft infection is difficult on clinical grounds. A prospective study compared CT and indium-labeled white blood cell (In-WBC) scans in the diagnosis of aortic graft infection. Five patients with aortic graft infection and three patients without aortic graft infection were studied by both methods. CT correctly detected the retroperitoneal extension of the infection in three patients with groin infection; In-WBC scans diagnosed the extension only in one patient. Both CT and In-WBC were positive in two patients with aortic graft infection but no groin infection. Both studies were negative in the three patients without evidence of aortic graft infection. The study suggests that CT is more sensitive than In-WBC in evaluating the extent of aortic graft infection and should be the imaging method of choice.
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
RadioGraphicsHome page
D. F. Orton, R. F. LeVeen, J. A. Saigh, W. C. Culp, J. L. Fidler, T. J. Lynch, T. C. Goertzen, and T. C. McCowan
Aortic Prosthetic Graft Infections: Radiologic Manifestations and Implications for Management
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2000; 20(4): 977 - 993.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
J. M. Slaiby, C.-M. Fan, and H. T. Aretz
Case 38-1999- A 62-Year-Old Woman with an Infected Right Foot and Aneurysmal Dilatation of a Femoral Artery
N. Engl. J. Med., December 16, 1999; 341(25): 1913 - 1921.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
VASC ENDOVASCULAR SURGHome page
L. di Marzo, R. J. Feldhaus, and R. D. Schultz
Surgical Treatment of Infected Aortofemoral Grafts: A Fifteen-Year Experience
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, July 1, 1987; 21(4): 229 - 236.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1985 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.