Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Assessment of deep venous thrombosis in the lower limbs and pelvis: MR venography versus duplex Doppler sonography.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996 Oct; 167(4):971-5.AA

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to compare the diagnostic value of MR venography and color Doppler sonography in the assessment of deep venous thrombosis.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

MR venograms and color Doppler examinations were obtained in 37 patients either with suspected deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs or pelvis or with pulmonary embolism. Two-dimensional time-of-flight venography was used for all studies. MR and color Doppler data were collected prospectively and analyzed in a blinded manner. In a subset of 21 patients, MR venography and color Doppler sonography were prospectively compared with contrast-enhanced venography.

RESULTS

When compared with contrast-enhanced venography, MR venography was 100% sensitive and 100% specific in the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis above the knee. Color Doppler imaging depicted 13 of 15 cases of deep venous thrombosis and 5 of 6 venous examinations that had normal results, yielding a sensitivity and a specificity of 87% and 83%, respectively. The differences in sensitivity and specificity between MR venography and color Doppler sonography were not statistically significant. MR venography was 95% sensitive and 99% specific in detecting the extension of deep venous thrombosis, compared with the 46% sensitivity and 100% specificity of color Doppler sonography (differences in sensitivity, p < .01). MR images showed 29 collateral vessels, whereas only 21 were detected by contrast-enhanced venography (p < .04).

CONCLUSION

MR venography seems to be more accurate than color Doppler sonography in detecting the extension of deep venous thrombosis. The positive diagnosis and extent of deep venous thrombosis can be easily detected and monitored by a noninvasive technique such as MR venography.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Laissy JP
Department of Radiology, Hôpital Bichat, Paris, France.
Cinqualbre A
No affiliation info available
Loshkajian A
No affiliation info available
Henry-Feugeas MC
No affiliation info available
Crestani B
No affiliation info available
Riquelme C
No affiliation info available
Schouman-Claeys E
No affiliation info available

MeSH

AdultAgedFemaleHumansLegMagnetic Resonance AngiographyMaleMiddle AgedPelvisPhlebographyProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityThrombophlebitisUltrasonography, Doppler, ColorVeins

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

8819396

Citation

Laissy, J P., et al. "Assessment of Deep Venous Thrombosis in the Lower Limbs and Pelvis: MR Venography Versus Duplex Doppler Sonography." AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 167, no. 4, 1996, pp. 971-5.
Laissy JP, Cinqualbre A, Loshkajian A, et al. Assessment of deep venous thrombosis in the lower limbs and pelvis: MR venography versus duplex Doppler sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167(4):971-5.
Laissy, J. P., Cinqualbre, A., Loshkajian, A., Henry-Feugeas, M. C., Crestani, B., Riquelme, C., & Schouman-Claeys, E. (1996). Assessment of deep venous thrombosis in the lower limbs and pelvis: MR venography versus duplex Doppler sonography. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 167(4), 971-5.
Laissy JP, et al. Assessment of Deep Venous Thrombosis in the Lower Limbs and Pelvis: MR Venography Versus Duplex Doppler Sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167(4):971-5. PubMed PMID: 8819396.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Assessment of deep venous thrombosis in the lower limbs and pelvis: MR venography versus duplex Doppler sonography. AU - Laissy,J P, AU - Cinqualbre,A, AU - Loshkajian,A, AU - Henry-Feugeas,M C, AU - Crestani,B, AU - Riquelme,C, AU - Schouman-Claeys,E, PY - 1996/10/1/pubmed PY - 1996/10/1/medline PY - 1996/10/1/entrez SP - 971 EP - 5 JF - AJR. American journal of roentgenology JO - AJR Am J Roentgenol VL - 167 IS - 4 N2 - OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the diagnostic value of MR venography and color Doppler sonography in the assessment of deep venous thrombosis. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: MR venograms and color Doppler examinations were obtained in 37 patients either with suspected deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs or pelvis or with pulmonary embolism. Two-dimensional time-of-flight venography was used for all studies. MR and color Doppler data were collected prospectively and analyzed in a blinded manner. In a subset of 21 patients, MR venography and color Doppler sonography were prospectively compared with contrast-enhanced venography. RESULTS: When compared with contrast-enhanced venography, MR venography was 100% sensitive and 100% specific in the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis above the knee. Color Doppler imaging depicted 13 of 15 cases of deep venous thrombosis and 5 of 6 venous examinations that had normal results, yielding a sensitivity and a specificity of 87% and 83%, respectively. The differences in sensitivity and specificity between MR venography and color Doppler sonography were not statistically significant. MR venography was 95% sensitive and 99% specific in detecting the extension of deep venous thrombosis, compared with the 46% sensitivity and 100% specificity of color Doppler sonography (differences in sensitivity, p < .01). MR images showed 29 collateral vessels, whereas only 21 were detected by contrast-enhanced venography (p < .04). CONCLUSION: MR venography seems to be more accurate than color Doppler sonography in detecting the extension of deep venous thrombosis. The positive diagnosis and extent of deep venous thrombosis can be easily detected and monitored by a noninvasive technique such as MR venography. SN - 0361-803X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/8819396/Assessment_of_deep_venous_thrombosis_in_the_lower_limbs_and_pelvis:_MR_venography_versus_duplex_Doppler_sonography_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -