Deep vein thrombosis venography: Difference between revisions
Kashish Goel (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DVT editors}} | |||
{{Deep vein thrombosis}} | {{Deep vein thrombosis}} | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
Revision as of 20:14, 13 June 2012
Editor(s)-In-Chief: The APEX Trial Investigators, C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-In-Chief: Cafer Zorkun, M.D., Ph.D. [2] Ujjwal Rastogi, MBBS [3]; Kashish Goel, M.D.; Assistant Editor(s)-In-Chief: Justine Cadet
|
Deep Vein Thrombosis Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Special Scenario |
|
Trials |
|
Case Studies |
|
Deep vein thrombosis venography On the Web |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Deep vein thrombosis venography |
Overview
Venography is the "gold standard" to diagnose venous thrombosis, however it is not the preferred test in clinical settings. It includes injection of contrast into the dorsal foot vein and checking for a intraluminal filling defect that is present in more than one view. It has gone out of favor and is unsuitable for clinical practice because of the following reasons:
- Invasive procedure
- Expensive
- Not available widely
- Large intra-observer and inter-observer variation
- Side effects of contrast administration including severe allergy, nephrotoxicity, nausea, dizziness, etc
- Upto 20% tests are inadequate for assessment
- Post-venography DVT (0-2%)