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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, D. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, D. H.

Radiology, Vol 197, 253-255, Copyright © 1995 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Positional variation in the Whitaker test

JH Ellis, RP Campo, MV Marx, RH Cohan, JF Platt, LP Sonda, GJ Faerber and DH Kim
Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor 48109-0030, USA.

PURPOSE: To describe positional variation in the outcome of the Whitaker test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the cases of six patients in whom the pressure gradient during Whitaker testing varied by at least 10 cm of water and changed from normal ( < or = 13 cm of water) to abnormal ( > 13 cm of water) when patients were placed in different positions. RESULTS: Four patients had obstruction only in nonstandard positions. All had intermittent symptoms, and three had ureteral kinks at fluoroscopy. Two patients with ileal conduits had abnormal results in the standard position but normal results at repositioning related to compression of the conduits (seen as conduit distention at fluoroscopy). All six had undergone urinary tract surgery. Gradient differences with positional change ranged from 10 to > 38 cm of water. CONCLUSIONS: Whitaker testing in different positions may help identify intermittent obstructions that might otherwise go undetected or prevent inappropriate diagnosis of obstruction. Intermittent or unexplained symptoms, tortuous ureters, malpositioned kidneys, or previous surgery are indications for provocative positional testing.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1995 by the Radiological Society of North America.