Comparison of digital subtraction and cut film arteriography in the evaluation of suspected thoracic aortic injury

Matthew S. Johnson, Himanshu Shah, Veronica J. Harris, John Snidow, Walter T. Ambrosius, Scott O. Trerotola

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether intraarterial digital subtraction arteriography (DSA) is as sensitive and specific as cut film arteriography (CFA) in the evaluation of suspected aortic injury resulting from blunt chest trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both CFA and DSA images of the thoracic aorta were obtained in the right posterior oblique (RPO) projection in 100 of 103 consecutive patients undergoing arteriography after blunt chest trauma. Diagnoses based on blinded separate review of both studies (CFA vs DSA) by four independent reviewers were compared. Reviewers graded their confidence in their diagnoses from 1 (certain) to 10 (uncertain). RESULTS: Eleven of 100 patients had aortic or great vessel injuries confirmed by operation (n = 10) or transesophageal echocardiography (n = 1). Three hundred eighty-eight of 400 diagnoses based on RPO CFA and 390 of 400 diagnoses based on RPO DSA agreed with the correct diagnoses. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of CFA versus DSA were not significantly different. The reviewers' confidence in their diagnoses was equivalent between CFA (average confidence score, 1.373) and DSA (average confidence score, 1.375). CONCLUSION: DSA and CFA yield equivalent sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of blunt chest trauma.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)799-807
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
Volume8
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Thoracic Injuries
Angiography
Thorax
Wounds and Injuries
Sensitivity and Specificity
Nonpenetrating Wounds
Transesophageal Echocardiography
Thoracic Aorta

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Comparison of digital subtraction and cut film arteriography in the evaluation of suspected thoracic aortic injury. / Johnson, Matthew S.; Shah, Himanshu; Harris, Veronica J.; Snidow, John; Ambrosius, Walter T.; Trerotola, Scott O.

In: Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Vol. 8, No. 5, 01.01.1997, p. 799-807.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Johnson, Matthew S. ; Shah, Himanshu ; Harris, Veronica J. ; Snidow, John ; Ambrosius, Walter T. ; Trerotola, Scott O. / Comparison of digital subtraction and cut film arteriography in the evaluation of suspected thoracic aortic injury. In: Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. 1997 ; Vol. 8, No. 5. pp. 799-807.
@article{2ddbff70527b4b799bed2bcbe3a2b933,
title = "Comparison of digital subtraction and cut film arteriography in the evaluation of suspected thoracic aortic injury",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To determine whether intraarterial digital subtraction arteriography (DSA) is as sensitive and specific as cut film arteriography (CFA) in the evaluation of suspected aortic injury resulting from blunt chest trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both CFA and DSA images of the thoracic aorta were obtained in the right posterior oblique (RPO) projection in 100 of 103 consecutive patients undergoing arteriography after blunt chest trauma. Diagnoses based on blinded separate review of both studies (CFA vs DSA) by four independent reviewers were compared. Reviewers graded their confidence in their diagnoses from 1 (certain) to 10 (uncertain). RESULTS: Eleven of 100 patients had aortic or great vessel injuries confirmed by operation (n = 10) or transesophageal echocardiography (n = 1). Three hundred eighty-eight of 400 diagnoses based on RPO CFA and 390 of 400 diagnoses based on RPO DSA agreed with the correct diagnoses. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of CFA versus DSA were not significantly different. The reviewers' confidence in their diagnoses was equivalent between CFA (average confidence score, 1.373) and DSA (average confidence score, 1.375). CONCLUSION: DSA and CFA yield equivalent sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of blunt chest trauma.",
author = "Johnson, {Matthew S.} and Himanshu Shah and Harris, {Veronica J.} and John Snidow and Ambrosius, {Walter T.} and Trerotola, {Scott O.}",
year = "1997",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S1051-0443(97)70663-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "799--807",
journal = "Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology",
issn = "1051-0443",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of digital subtraction and cut film arteriography in the evaluation of suspected thoracic aortic injury

AU - Johnson, Matthew S.

AU - Shah, Himanshu

AU - Harris, Veronica J.

AU - Snidow, John

AU - Ambrosius, Walter T.

AU - Trerotola, Scott O.

PY - 1997/1/1

Y1 - 1997/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To determine whether intraarterial digital subtraction arteriography (DSA) is as sensitive and specific as cut film arteriography (CFA) in the evaluation of suspected aortic injury resulting from blunt chest trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both CFA and DSA images of the thoracic aorta were obtained in the right posterior oblique (RPO) projection in 100 of 103 consecutive patients undergoing arteriography after blunt chest trauma. Diagnoses based on blinded separate review of both studies (CFA vs DSA) by four independent reviewers were compared. Reviewers graded their confidence in their diagnoses from 1 (certain) to 10 (uncertain). RESULTS: Eleven of 100 patients had aortic or great vessel injuries confirmed by operation (n = 10) or transesophageal echocardiography (n = 1). Three hundred eighty-eight of 400 diagnoses based on RPO CFA and 390 of 400 diagnoses based on RPO DSA agreed with the correct diagnoses. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of CFA versus DSA were not significantly different. The reviewers' confidence in their diagnoses was equivalent between CFA (average confidence score, 1.373) and DSA (average confidence score, 1.375). CONCLUSION: DSA and CFA yield equivalent sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of blunt chest trauma.

AB - PURPOSE: To determine whether intraarterial digital subtraction arteriography (DSA) is as sensitive and specific as cut film arteriography (CFA) in the evaluation of suspected aortic injury resulting from blunt chest trauma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both CFA and DSA images of the thoracic aorta were obtained in the right posterior oblique (RPO) projection in 100 of 103 consecutive patients undergoing arteriography after blunt chest trauma. Diagnoses based on blinded separate review of both studies (CFA vs DSA) by four independent reviewers were compared. Reviewers graded their confidence in their diagnoses from 1 (certain) to 10 (uncertain). RESULTS: Eleven of 100 patients had aortic or great vessel injuries confirmed by operation (n = 10) or transesophageal echocardiography (n = 1). Three hundred eighty-eight of 400 diagnoses based on RPO CFA and 390 of 400 diagnoses based on RPO DSA agreed with the correct diagnoses. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of CFA versus DSA were not significantly different. The reviewers' confidence in their diagnoses was equivalent between CFA (average confidence score, 1.373) and DSA (average confidence score, 1.375). CONCLUSION: DSA and CFA yield equivalent sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of blunt chest trauma.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030720966&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030720966&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S1051-0443(97)70663-8

DO - 10.1016/S1051-0443(97)70663-8

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 799

EP - 807

JO - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

JF - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

SN - 1051-0443

IS - 5

ER -