AJR ARRS: Your Link to CME
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 Braun, I.
Right arrow Articles by Tindall, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Braun, I.
Right arrow Articles by Tindall, G.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 145, Issue 4, 785-790
Copyright © 1985 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Contrast enhancement in CT differentiation between recurrent disk herniation and postoperative scar: prospective study

IF Braun, JC Hoffman Jr, PC Davis, JA Landman, and GT Tindall

Recurrent disk herniation and postoperative scarring are among the major causes of recurrent symptoms after surgery for lumbar disk disease. The myelographic differentiation between these two etiologies is, at best, difficult. To evaluate the role of intravenous contrast enhancement and its impact on making this differentiation using computed tomography (CT), 98 postoperative symptomatic patients were studied prospectively with this technique. Twenty-two patients had subsequent reexploration (23 disk spaces). The unenhanced and enhanced studies of these patients were interpreted independently without surgical information. With contrast enhancement, only three CT studies were considered indeterminate, whereas 10 studies without contrast enhancement were indeterminate. The overall correct diagnosis with contrast enhancement was 17 (74%) of 23, while only 43% of the unenhanced studies yielded the correct diagnosis. Therefore, intravenous contrast enhancement significantly increased the diagnostic accuracy and level of confidence in making the differentiation between recurrent herniated disk and scar.
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
JBJSHome page
S. D. BODEN
Current Concepts Review - The Use of Radiographic Imaging Studies in the Evaluation of Patients Who Have Degenerative Disorders of the Lumbar Spine
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 1996; 78(1): 114 - 24.
[Full Text]




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