My then co-worker Kathleen Bower got to do a carotid scan on John Carradine (Stagecoach, preacher in Grapes of Wrath, hundreds of other movies, father of those other Carradines). And we took care of Olaf Wieghorst (very highly-regarded Western artist) and his wife.

But the folks across town at Scripps Green did Mother Theresa, so they all kind of glow now.

Once when I visited Jean at Cedars, we saw Stewart Granger walking along in a bathrobe. I think you have to be pretty old to care about him (or John Carradine) unless you watch a lot of TCM channel.

Don Ridgway





-----Original Message-----
From: UVM Flownet on behalf of Crafton, James W
Sent: Wed 5/27/2009 12:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: arterial duplex criteria
 
Hi Don
Now Don, don't you get a few stars at Grossmont!
Take Care

-----Original Message-----
From: UVM Flownet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Don Ridgway
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:09 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: arterial duplex criteria

Jean Ellison at Cedars-Sinai (the hospital of the stars) long ago validated stenotic:prestenotic ratios of 2:1 for 50% and 4:1 for 75%. I was under the impression that these are still widely used; we do, either combined with or not with 200 cm/sec and 400 cm/sec PSV for the two levels of significant stenosis. If you get the 400 cm/sec and/or 4:1 ratio, it seems reasonable to call it high-grade vs. just >50%.


Don Ridgway





-----Original Message-----
From: UVM Flownet on behalf of Jeff Stanley
Sent: Wed 5/27/2009 12:03 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: arterial duplex criteria
 
I tend to use the greater/lesser than 50% most of the time since our surgeons are basically looking for significant disease that would correlate with the pt's symptoms.  I'll usually comment that it may be >75% if the EDV is over 100 cm/sec.  We use the 100% increase in velocity (ratio of 2.0) or more to say it is significant, along with change in waveform.  Reversed flow component should be lost distally to say a stenosis is significant.

Anyone using the 20-49% category (velocity increase of 30%-100% with spectral broadening and visualized stenosis)?

Jeff Stanley BS,RVT
The Surgical Clinic
Nashville, TN

-----Original Message-----
From: UVM Flownet on behalf of Combs, Kristin
Sent: Wed 5/27/2009 1:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: arterial duplex criteria
 
 
Hello all-
Just wondering if people are still using the diagnostic criteria for arterial duplex that has >50% stenosis being 100% increase in velocity when compared with the proximal non diseased segment. < 50% as being less than 100%.  Is anyone out there quantifying stenosis categories >75%? I have seen some articles recently that seem to be promoting just <50%, and > 50%.....

To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html


To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html

To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html


To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html