Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
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 Hricak, H.
Right arrow Articles by Higgins, C. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hricak, H.
Right arrow Articles by Higgins, C. B.

Radiology, Vol 156, 415-422, Copyright © 1985 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Abdominal venous system: assessment using MR

H Hricak, E Amparo, MR Fisher, L Crooks and CB Higgins

Twenty-five patients with known or suspected evidence of venous disease based on results of computed tomography, angiography, or ultrasound were imaged with magnetic resonance (MR) to determine the MR characterization of venous abnormalities. MR findings were proved by laparotomy or autopsy in 18 of 25 cases. In seven of 25 patients in whom only biopsy was performed, the MR findings were correlated with findings from other radiologic tests. On MR, the inferior vena cava (IVC), portal vein, and their major tributaries were seen in all but two cases. In those two, identification of collaterals led to the correct diagnosis of splenic vein thrombosis in one case and left renal vein thrombosis in another. MR imaging helped identify intraluminal thrombi in the IVC (12 of 12 cases), portal vein (two of two cases), renal veins (seven of seven cases), superior mesenteric vein (one case), and iliac veins (seven of seven cases). Intraluminal signal intensity secondary to slow blood flow seen in five patients was always differentiated from the thrombus. MR imaging helped identify correctly the nature of the thrombus in 11 of 16 patients. In five patients, the differentiation between tumor thrombus and blood clot thrombus was not possible. Involvement of the IVC wall by tumor was seen in four cases. MR imaging also accurately depicted slow flow in obstructed or constricted veins; encasement, compression, or displacement of veins without intraluminal occlusions; and the presence of venous collaterals. The MR imaging evaluation of venous abnormalities is accurate, easily performed, and will probably become an important application.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
VASC ENDOVASCULAR SURGHome page
R. B. Rafal, W. M. Williams, and J. A. Markisz
Venous Thrombosis: Detection via Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, March 1, 1993; 27(2): 115 - 121.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
ANGIOLOGYHome page
M. S. Campbell Soo, M. B. Khoury, and A. R. Lupetin
Splenic Vein Aneurysm: MR Appearance A Case Report
Angiology, July 1, 1991; 42(7): 590 - 593.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1985 by the Radiological Society of North America.