Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yuh, W. T.
Right arrow Articles by Corry, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yuh, W. T.
Right arrow Articles by Corry, R. J.

Radiology, Vol 167, 679-683, Copyright © 1988 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Pancreatic transplant imaging

WT Yuh, JA Wiese, MM Abu-Yousef, K Rezai, Y Sato, KS Berbaum, SC Kao, LG Hunsicker and RJ Corry
Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City 52242.

Forty-four clinical episodes of suspected (pancreas) transplant rejection in 17 pancreatic transplantation patients were reviewed retrospectively. The clinical impression of acute graft rejection, chronic rejection, or nonrejection in each episode was correlated with the results of 19 nuclear medicine, 12 ultrasound (US), and 44 magnetic resonance (MR) imaging studies. US was found to be a moderately sensitive (82%) method of detecting graft rejection. US also was effective in identifying intra- and peripancreatic fluid accumulations. Nuclear medicine imaging was also a sensitive technique (86%) and the only modality that provided physiologic information regarding graft perfusion. MR imaging allowed correct prediction of the presence or absence of graft rejection in 39 of 44 cases (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 76%) and was an effective means of detecting pathologic fluid collections. Nuclear medicine, US, and MR imaging are all believed to be sensitive methods of detecting graft rejection and are complementary adjuncts to the clinical evaluation of pancreatic transplants.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
J. T. Heverhagen, H.-J. Wagner, H. Ebel, A. L. Levine, K. J. Klose, and A. Hellinger
Pancreatic Transplants: Noninvasive Evaluation with Secretin-augmented MR Pancreatography and MR Perfusion Measurements--Preliminary Results
Radiology, October 1, 2004; 233(1): 273 - 280.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
P. Nikolaidis, R. S. Amin, C. M. Hwang, R. M. McCarthy, J. H. Clark, S. A. Gruber, and P. C. Chen
Role of Sonography in Pancreatic Transplantation
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2003; 23(4): 939 - 949.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
T. L. Krebs, B. Daly, J. J. Wong-You-Cheong, K. Carroll, and S. T. Bartlett
Acute Pancreatic Transplant Rejection: Evaluation with Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging Compared with Histopathologic Analysis
Radiology, February 1, 1999; 210(2): 437 - 442.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 Journal of Diagnostic Medical SonographyHome page
L. B. Newberry and R. C. Nelson
Duplex Sonography in the Evaluation of Pancreas Transplants
Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, March 1, 1991; 7(2): 74 - 80.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1988 by the Radiological Society of North America.