Magnetic resonance venography to evaluate the deep venous system of the pelvis in patients who have an acetabular fracture.
- 1 November 1995
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
- Vol. 77 (11) , 1639-1649
- https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199511000-00002
Abstract
We performed a prospective, blinded study to assess and compare the values of preoperative contrast venography and magnetic resonance venography in the detection of deep venous thrombosis in the thigh and pelvis of forty-five consecutive patients who had a displaced acetabular fracture. The magnetic resonance venography and contrast venography were performed an average of seven days (range, one to twenty-nine days) after the injury. Twenty-four asymptomatic thrombi were identified with magnetic resonance venography in fifteen (33 per cent) of the patients. Four of the thombi were in the superficial femoral vein, nine were in the common femoral vein, one was in the external iliac vein, seven were in the internal iliac vein, and three were in the common iliac vein. Ten (42 per cent) of the twenty-four thrombi were confirmed with contrast venography; nine of them were located in the thigh. The remaining fourteen thrombi (58 per cent) that had been noted on magnetic resonance venography could not be seen with contrast venography because they were located either in the deep pelvic veins or in the uninjured extremity. The thrombi in the internal iliac vein were identified only with magnetic resonance venography. Twelve of the fifteen patients who had thrombi had a filter placed in the inferior vena cava preoperatively. In eight of these patients, the filter was placed because of the findings of magnetic resonance venography alone. Magnetic resonance venography resulted in a change in the therapeutic management of ten (22 per cent) of the forty-five patients. There were no pulmonary emboli. We concluded that magnetic resonance venography is superior to contrast venography for the preoperative evaluation of proximal deep venous thrombosis in patients who have an acetabular fracture.Magnetic resonance venography is non-invasive, does not require the use of contrast medium, images the proximal aspects of both lower extremities simultaneously, and, most importantly, allows for the identification of deep venous thrombosis in the pelvis.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Magnetic resonance venography for the detection of deep venous thrombosis: Comparison with contrast venography and duplex Doppler ultrasonographyJournal of Vascular Surgery, 1993
- Vena Tech-LGM filter: long-term results of a prospective study.Radiology, 1993
- Low Accuracy of Color Doppler Ultrasound in the Detection of Proximal Leg Vein Thrombosis in Asymptomatic High-Risk PatientsAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1992
- Inferior Vena Cava FiltersArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1992
- Deep venous thrombosis of extremities: role of MR imaging in the diagnosis.Radiology, 1990
- Comparison of Real-Time B-Mode Ultrasonog raphy and Bilateral Ascending Phlebography for Detection of Postoperative Deep Vein Thrombosis Following Elective Hip SurgeryThrombosis and Haemostasis, 1989
- Contrast venography of the leg: diagnostic efficacy, tolerance, and complication rates with ionic and nonionic contrast media.Radiology, 1987
- Complications encountered with the use of the Greenfield filterThe American Journal of Surgery, 1987
- Jugular venous thrombosis: MR imaging.Radiology, 1985
- THROMBOTIC SIDE-EFFECTS OF LOWER-LIMB PHLEBOGRAPHYThe Lancet, 1976