Literature DB >> 2195270

Abdominal aortic aneurysm evaluation: comparison of US, CT, MRI, and angiography.

P Pavone1, E Di Cesare, P Di Renzi, L Marsili, M Ventura, C Spartera, R Passariello.   

Abstract

We studied 26 cases of abdominal aortic aneurysm with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), ultrasonography (US), and angiography. Data acquired were compared to those obtained at surgery. Diameter of the aneurysm was correctly defined in all cases by CT and MRI, while angiography underestimated the diameter of lesions without peripheral calcifications. Involvement of renal arteries was present in four cases and correctly diagnosed with MRI and angiography in all of them. CT did provide this information in three cases and US were not useful. Also, iliac arteries involvement was depicted by CT, MRI, and angiography in 10 out of 10 patients. Coronal sections of MRI provided comparable images to those of angiography. By comparing these different techniques we verified the good reliability of MRI as investigation tool for an accurate evaluation of aneurysms; its only limit lying in the poor capability of detecting calcifications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2195270     DOI: 10.1016/0730-725x(90)90089-k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  3 in total

Review 1.  Abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  J B Reuler; K L Kumar
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1991 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Dogs detect dangerous gases.

Authors:  J R Gibbs
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Aortic pathology revealed by MRI in patients with clinical suspicion of spinal disease.

Authors:  E M Larsson; M Heiling; S Holtås
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.804

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.