Bookbot

Small Bowel Radiology

Introduction and Atlas

Parámetros

  • 207 páginas
  • 8 horas de lectura

Más información sobre el libro

Since the small bowel except the duodenum and (1961), Pygott et al. (1960), Gianturco (1967) terminal ileum is largely inaccessible during en and Bilbao et al. (1967). doscopic examination, radiology of the small Sellink, however, was really responsible for bowel attains special significance as a diagnostic the widespread recognition of enteroclysis method. Owing to the length and position of (1971, 1974, 1976). In spite of the increasing this organ, good images are difficult to obtain. popularity of this method, the necessity for sub Furthermore, the considerable variation oftran stituting this apparently viable method for the sit time, unpredictable response of the contrast peroral examination is still equivocal (Rabe medium, and superimposition with the filled etal. 1981; Fried etal. 1981; Maglinte etal. loops make small bowel radiology difficult. As 1982; Ott et al. 1985). Comparisons of both methods, however, (Fleckenstein and Pedersen a result, few radiologists specialize in this field. With the exception of Crohn's disease, disorders 1975; Sanders and Ho 1976; Ekberg 1977; Val lance 1980) have confirmed the superiority of of the small bowel are relatively rare. Thus, not many clinicians and radiologists are interested enteroclysis. It achieves a high accuracy (Antes in the small intestine. and Lissner 1983)."

Compra de libros

Small Bowel Radiology, Günther Antesberger, Josef Lissner, Franz Eggemann

Idioma
Publicado en
1988
Encuadernación
(Tapa dura),
Estado del libro
Bueno
Precio
25,49 €

Métodos de pago

Nadie lo ha calificado todavía.Añadir reseña

Título
Small Bowel Radiology
Subtítulo
Introduction and Atlas
Idioma
Inglés
Editorial
Springer
Publicado en
1988
Formato
Tapa dura
Páginas
207
ISBN10
3540152636
ISBN13
9783540152637
Serie
Descripción
Since the small bowel except the duodenum and (1961), Pygott et al. (1960), Gianturco (1967) terminal ileum is largely inaccessible during en and Bilbao et al. (1967). doscopic examination, radiology of the small Sellink, however, was really responsible for bowel attains special significance as a diagnostic the widespread recognition of enteroclysis method. Owing to the length and position of (1971, 1974, 1976). In spite of the increasing this organ, good images are difficult to obtain. popularity of this method, the necessity for sub Furthermore, the considerable variation oftran stituting this apparently viable method for the sit time, unpredictable response of the contrast peroral examination is still equivocal (Rabe medium, and superimposition with the filled etal. 1981; Fried etal. 1981; Maglinte etal. loops make small bowel radiology difficult. As 1982; Ott et al. 1985). Comparisons of both methods, however, (Fleckenstein and Pedersen a result, few radiologists specialize in this field. With the exception of Crohn's disease, disorders 1975; Sanders and Ho 1976; Ekberg 1977; Val lance 1980) have confirmed the superiority of of the small bowel are relatively rare. Thus, not many clinicians and radiologists are interested enteroclysis. It achieves a high accuracy (Antes in the small intestine. and Lissner 1983)."