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


     


Published online before print June 21, 2002, 10.1148/radiol.2242011245
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Simonovsky, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Simonovsky, V.

Normal Appendix: Is There Any Significant Difference in the Maximal Mural Thickness at US between Pediatric and Adult Populations?1

Václav Simonovsky, MD, CSc

1 From the Ultrasound Unit, 3rd Polyclinic, Príbram, Czech Republic; and Clinic of Imaging Methods, Faculty Hospital Motol and 2nd Medical Faculty of Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. Received July 23, 2001; revision requested August 24; revision received November 26; accepted January 22, 2002. Address correspondence to the author, U Slávie 34, 263 01 Dobrís, Czech Republic (e-mail: simonovsky@post.cz).



View larger version (106K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Transverse US scan of a normal collapsed-lumen appendix during compression shows characteristic ovoid configuration. Outer diameter is measured as the anteroposterior distance between the opposite hyperechoic serosal layers (ie, between the calipers, 3.5 mm). Appendiceal wall thickness is defined as the distance halfway of the measured distance. The thin central echogenic line corresponds to collapsed mucosal surfaces. Note that the hyperechoic line ventral to the proximal caliper is related to the ileum rather than to the appendix itself. MP = iliopsoas muscle, TI = terminal ileum. (Reprinted, with permission, from reference 12.)

 


View larger version (92K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Left: Longitudinal US scan of a long segment of a normal collapsed-lumen appendix (between calipers) with a wall that has the typical multilayered structure. Right: Transverse US scan shows a pronounced ovoid configuration of this very easily compressible appendix. The anteroposterior distance between the opposite hyperechoic serosal layers defines the outer caliber (between the calipers, 2.3 mm). The thin central hyperechogenic line represents the collapsed lumen. TI = terminal ileum.

 


View larger version (18K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Scattergram illustrates the MMTs in 187 visualized normal appendices plotted against the age of the patients.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2002 by the Radiological Society of North America.