CT v angio people see what they are prepared to see)

• Previous message: CT v angio people see what they are prepared to see)
• Next message: CT v angio people see what they are prepared to see)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

I will be posting the chest CT from the GE "light Speed" scanner that was
taken of this patient.

I will also post more details of the case with the CT.

Andrew Bowman

----- Original Message -----
From: <SJASMD@aol.com>
To: <trauma-list@trauma.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 12:42 AM
Subject: CT v angio people see what they are prepared to see)


> In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002 9:15:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,
sumieb@compuserve.com writes:
>
> >
> >
> > We had a case, man struck by car on his motorcycle.  Wide mediastinum,
GE
> > "light speed" CT scanner showed an "intimal flap".  Vital signs stable.
> > Transferred to pump capable hospital across town.  Median sternotomy
> > showed???????
> >
> > That's right....NORMAL aorta.  Eeeeeeeek!!!!!
> >
> > I had even stated to EDP AND the CV surgeon..."Dr Mattox says this guy
would
> > need an angio"  I was ignored.  I probably will not be in the future.
> >
> > Andrew J. Bowman, RN, CEN, CCRN, NREMT-P
> > Patient Care Coordinator
> > Education Coordinator (Trauma & Emergency Cardiovascular Care)
> > Emergency Department
> > Home Hospital Campus
> > Greater Lafayette Health Services, Inc.
> > Home Hospital Campus
> > Lafayette, Indiana  47904
> > USA
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <KMATTOX@aol.com>
> > To: <trauma-list@trauma.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM
> > Subject: Re: CT versus angio (they're not mutually exclusive)
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I could not DISAGREE with your summary of CT any stronger.   You have
made
> > > statements which, yes, are often requoted and restated, but data to
> > support
> > > them is lacking.    If there is enough suspicion from the history,
> > physical,
> > > or initial plain chest X-ray to lead to a CT, then one should go
straight
> > to
> > > the arteriogram suite.   A negative CT does NOT address the many
injuries
> > to
> > > branch vessels, injury to the ascending aorta, or differentiate the
many
> > > congenital annomalies.    Furthermore, there are increasing people who
are
> > > operating on the basis of the CT alone and law suits are
> > arising.   Do NOT
> > > fall into this trap.
> > >
> > > k
> > >
> > > --
> > > trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
> > > To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
> > > http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
> > To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
> > http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html
> Mr bowman
> any possibility of posting a jpeg of the "intimal flap" so we can see what
was there.
>
> Was an aortotomy done? If not, how can we be sure that there was not an
intimal flap.
>
> Please don't attack me. I likely would not want to have an isolated
intimal flap explored anyway but it would be nice to know whether the
detractors are valid in their detraction of the images.
>
> Sal Sclafani
>
>
> --
> trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
> To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
> http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html
>

• Previous message: CT v angio people see what they are prepared to see)
• Next message: CT v angio people see what they are prepared to see)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]