Search

We studied 54 asymptomatic postmenopausal women to characterize normal contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) appearance of endometrium. Endometrium was visualized in 26 out of 54 (48.1%) women, and when seen its mean short-axis thickness was 7.5 mm. The anteroposterior thickness varied directly with uterine angulation (P

Background: To determine whether intravenous contrast improves the ability of radiologists to establish the cause of acute abdominal pain after nondiagnostic or normal unenhanced CT. Methods: Out of 164 consecutive emergency department patients presenting with less than 48 h of nontraumatic, acute abdominal pain, a confident diagnosis for cause of pain was made prospectively in 71/164 (43%) patients on these unenhanced scans by the monitoring radiologist. In the other 93 patients, our study sample, intravenous contrast-enhanced CT was obtained. At a later date, retrospectively, two experienced abdominal CT radiologists independently evaluated unenhanced CT scans alone for potential causes of pain and diagnostic confidence level on a 1–3 scale. At least 2 weeks later, intravenous enhanced and unenhanced scans were read side-by-side for the same assessment. Results: There was no significant difference in diagnostic confidence levels comparing unenhanced CT alone (2.59) vs. intravenous enhanced and unenhanced CT together (2.64). Chi-square analysis found no significant difference in finding a cause for pain when intravenous contrast was added compared to the initial unenhanced scan alone. Conclusions: Intravenous contrast did not significantly improve the ability of CT to establish a cause of abdominal pain after a negative or nondiagnostic unenhanced CT.

A prospective comparison of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and duplex sonography (DS) was performed to examine the Kimray-Greenfield filter in the inferior vena cava (IVC) in the immediate postoperative period. Fourteen patients were studied for five complications: IVC thrombosis, malpositioning, pericaval hematoma, filter angulation, and prong perforation. Our results found CT to be more efficacious because it was a) able to evaluate more patients with fewer technically inadequate scans and b) more definitive in all categories. However, when visualized, DS was as accurate as CT in the evaluation of thrombosis.

We studied 54 asymptomatic postmenopausal women to characterize normal contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) appearance of endometrium. Endometrium was visualized in 26 out of 54 (48.1%) women, and when seen its mean short-axis thickness was 7.5 mm. The anteroposterior thickness varied directly with uterine angulation (P.05). Endometrial attenuation was significantly less than that of the myometrium (P.05). Endometrial thickness (short axis) and attenuation were inversely correlated to patient age and to years after menopause (P.05). We believe that our findings will help prevent overdiagnosis of endometrial fluid or thickening in asymptomatic women.

The space between the left lobe of the liver and the lesser curvature of the stomach normally contains intraperitoneal structures. These include the gastrohepatic recess of the greater peritoneal cavity, the medial recess of the lesser sac and the interposed gastrohepatic ligament. An anterior protrusion of retroperitoneum can project into this space, dorsal to the posterior reflection of the medial compartment of the lesser sac. Tumors that extend into this fossa are anterior and medial to the fundic and upper body region of the stomach. These tumors may cause confusion regarding their origin if the radiologist is not aware of the existence of this retroperitoneal protrusion. Between 1982, and 1986, 183 patients with pancreatic cancer were hospitalized at our institution, 63 of whom had computed tomography (CT) scans of the abdomen. Four of these patients (6.3%) demonstrated direct tumor extension anterior to the stomach. During this same period, four large benign retroperitoneal tumors also exhibited this finding. Masses in the gastrohepatic interval between the liver and stomach can be extensions of retroperitoneal processes and should not be assumed to represent intraperitoneal involvement.