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 Chen, P. C.
Right arrow Articles by Weaver, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chen, P. C.
Right arrow Articles by Weaver, J. E.
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 170, 1299-1302, Copyright © 1998 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Sonographic detection of echogenic fluid and correlation with culdocentesis in the evaluation of ectopic pregnancy

PC Chen, GK Sickler, TJ Dubinsky, N Maklad, RL Jacobi and JE Weaver
Department of Radiology, The University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston 77030, USA.

OBJECTIVE: Because the presence of echogenic fluid on transvaginal sonography has been shown to correlate well with hemoperitoneum in patients with possible ectopic pregnancy, the aim of this study was to compare echogenic fluid on sonography with the results of culdocentesis in predicting hemoperitoneum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Free fluid on transvaginal sonography and the results of culdocentesis were correlated with the presence or absence of hemoperitoneum in 46 patients at surgery. Forty ectopic pregnancies and six nonectopic pregnancies were found. Echogenic fluid was the criterion used to establish hemoperitoneum on sonography. For statistical analysis, negative and nondiagnostic culdocentesis results were combined. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of each diagnostic technique were compared. RESULTS: In 40 of 46 patients with ectopic pregnancy, the sensitivity and specificity of echogenic fluid for establishing hemoperitoneum were 100% and 100%, respectively, compared with 66% and 80%, respectively, for culdocentesis. More important, the negative predictive value of a nondiagnostic culdocentesis was 25% compared with 100% for echogenic fluid in the ectopic subgroup of patients. In two patients with incomplete abortions, sonography failed to detect small amounts of hemoperitoneum at surgery performed 4 hr and 7 days after sonography. CONCLUSION: Sonography is more sensitive than culdocentesis in the detection of hemoperitoneum. Culdocentesis is invasive, and nondiagnostic results cannot be used to exclude hemoperitoneum. Culdocentesis should play no role in the evaluation of ectopic pregnancy except in the unusual circumstance in which high-resolution sonography cannot be readily performed.
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
 RadiologyHome page
C. B. Sirlin, G. Casola, M. A. Brown, N. Patel, E. J. Bendavid, R. Deutsch, and D. B. Hoyt
US of Blunt Abdominal Trauma: Importance of Free Pelvic Fluid in Women of Reproductive Age
Radiology, April 1, 2001; 219(1): 229 - 235.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.