What is the clinical utility of a 6-month computed tomography in the follow-up of endovascular aneurysm repair patients? Michael R. Go, MD, Joel E. Barbato, MD, Robert Y. Rhee, MD, Michel S. Makaroun, MD Journal of Vascular Surgery Volume 47, Issue 6, Pages 1181-1187 (June 2008) DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.01.056 Copyright © 2008 The Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 1 Protocol for computed tomography (CT) surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), including number and types of endoleak at each follow-up patients in group I, group II, and those with abnormal results on 1-month CT scans. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2008 47, 1181-1187DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2008.01.056) Copyright © 2008 The Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 2 Proximal attachment site in the group I patient who developed a type 1 leak at (A) 1 month, (B) 6 months, and (C) at 1 year when the leak developed. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2008 47, 1181-1187DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2008.01.056) Copyright © 2008 The Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 3 The 6-month computed tomography scan of the group I patient who developed main body thrombosis showed no evidence of stenosis at the narrowest portion of the aorta. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2008 47, 1181-1187DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2008.01.056) Copyright © 2008 The Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 4 The 6-month computed tomography scan of the group I patient who developed limb thrombosis showed no evidence of stenosis at the narrowest portion of the aorta. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2008 47, 1181-1187DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2008.01.056) Copyright © 2008 The Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions