| cheapbag214s |
|
|
| |
| Joined: 27 Jun 2013 |
| Posts: 20570 |
Read: 0 topics
Warns: 0/5
|
| Location: England |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| what common sense might suggest should have been investigated long ago -- they want a trial randomizing stable patients with small emboli to observation vs. anticoagulation to see if there's any evidence at all that everyone with a PE even requires treatment."Better technology allows us to diagnose more emboli,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], but to minimize harms of over-diagnosis we must learn which ones matter,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]," Dr. Soylemez Wiener stated.There are other compelling reasons to look at the widespread use of CTPA to consider if using the test for screening is worth additional known dangers associated with the scan,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], too. For example,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], the FDA lists possible allergic reactions or even kidney failure due to the contrast agent,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], or "dye" used in the test. There's also an increased lifetime risk of cancer linked to x-ray radiation exposure from CTPAs.A study published in the journal Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine concluded the radiation dose of CTPA for women undergoing a single 64-slice CTPA procedure increases the risk |
|
