Contrast-enhanced MR angiography for evaluation of vascular complications of the pancreatic transplant

Radiographics

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 687-695

  Dobos, Nora ^a,c   Roberts, David A ^b   Insko, Erik K ^a,d   Siegelman, Evan S ^a   Naji, Ali ^a   Markmann, James F ^a  

^a HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b Kennedy Health System   (United States)

^c Mecklenburg Radiology Associates ^*  (United States)

^d Mecklenburg Radiology Associates   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLOOD VESSEL INJURY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; GRAFT FAILURE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MEDICAL RECORD; PANCREAS TRANSPLANTATION; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREDICTION; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

EID: 20444468161     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.253045094     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Freund MC, Steurer W, Gassner EM, et al. Spectrum of imaging findings after pancreas transplantation with enteric exocrine drainage: part 1 - posttransplantation anatomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:911-917.
2. Eubank WB, Schmiedl UP, Levy AE, Marsh CL. Venous thrombosis and occlusion after pancreas transplantation: evaluation with breath-hold gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:381-385.
3. Boeve WJ, Kok T, Tegzess AM, et al. Comparison of contrast enhanced MR-angiography-MRI and digital subtraction angiography in the evaluation of pancreas and/or kidney transplantation patients: initial experience. Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 19:595-607.
4. Dachman AH, Newmark GM, Thistlethwaite JR Jr, Oto A, Bruce DS, Newell KA. Imaging of pancreatic transplantation using portal venous and enteric exocrine drainage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 171:157-163.
5. Winston CB, Mitchell DG, Outwater EK, Ehrlich SM. Pancreatic signal intensity on T1-weighted fat saturation MR images: clinical correlation. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995; 5:267-271.
6. Meador TL, Krebs TL, Cheong JJ, Daly B, Keay S, Bartlett S. Imaging features of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder in pancreas transplant recipients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 174:121-124.
7. Yu JS, Rofsky NM. Dynamic subtraction MR imaging of the liver: advantages and pitfalls. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180:1351-1357.
8. Insko EK, Siegelman ES, Stolpen AH. Subacute clot mimicking flow in a thrombosed arterial bypass graft on two-dimensional time-of-flight and three-dimensional contrast-enhanced MRA. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11:192-194.
9. Larson TS, Bohorquez H, Rea DJ, et al. Pancreas-after-kidney transplantation: an increasingly attractive alternative to simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 77:838-843.
10. Krebs TL, Daly B, Wong-You-Cheong JJ, Carroll K, Bartlett ST. Acute pancreatic transplant rejection: evaluation with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging compared with histopathologic analysis. Radiology 1999; 210:437-442.