blunt cardiac contusion

• Previous message: blunt cardiac contusion
• Next message: blunt cardiac contusion
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Actually, the part that is inconsistent with the data and demands justification is the contention that normal screening CT need be followed by angiography.
 
And, no, I still don't 'get' that part. Was hoping there might be some rational explanation.
 
Is there?
 

DocRickFry at aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 11/20/2004 11:19:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
mmcbridemd at yahoo.com writes:

Finally, if a positive finding on 'screening CT' MUST be followed by 
aortography (to confirm correct dx); and if a negative finding on 'screening CT' is 
not reliable and must be supplanted (as you suggest in this case) by 
aortography, then what role - precisely - is there for the test at all?

Meredith



Ahhhh--now you are beginning to understand--altho it took long enough!
ERF
--
trauma-list : TRAUMA.ORG
To change your settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://www.trauma.org/traumalist.html

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Discover all that’s new in My Yahoo!

• Previous message: blunt cardiac contusion
• Next message: blunt cardiac contusion
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]