Abstract
In 11 instances (6%) of 183 consecutive hepatic angiograms done for subsequently proven pathologic hepatic processes, either the diagnosis was incorrect (4 patients) or a satisfactory differential diagnosis was not established (7 patients), despite obvious angiographic abnormalities. Incorrect diagnoses were made in patients with suppurative hapatocarcinoma and liver cyst, macronodular regenerative cirrhosis, and multiple intrahepatic abscesses. Satisfactory differential diagnoses could not be established in patients with enlarged intrahepatic ducts, acute viral hepatitis, recurrent cirrhosis and acute liver necrosis. On analysis, means for minimizing diagnostic failure include the use of enhancement techniques such as infusion angiography and pharmacoangiography and an unbiased, detailed analysis of the angiographic findings. Changes secondary to the pathologic process and the coexistence of multiple processes, however, can occasionally prevent an accurate diagnosis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: RöFo - Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Röntgenstrahlen und der bildgebenden Verfahren
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
