Print

Print


I think this falls under the auspices of "just because you can,  
doesn't mean you should!".  (i feel) Airing out the personal medical  
information of an individual is not professional nor ethical, and it  
really isnt our personal decision to decide the terms of what we feel  
will cause no harm if we share it.
Maybe mrs "smith" doesn't feel it's anyones business she had a CT scan  
no matter how good she looks. That's how rumors start that can take on  
a very painful life of their own. It's cavalier sharing of personal  
medical information that created the HIPPA governing in the first place

D

Doug Marcum RDMS,RDCS,RVT(APS)
Advanced Ultrasound Consultants
Elite Solutions for Vein Therapy/ Insufficiency Scanning and On-Site  
Education
P: 321.231.2191
F: 407-971-4775
www.advancedusconsultants.com
[log in to unmask]
Sent from my iPhone

On May 27, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Jeff Stanley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 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