Skip to main content
Log in

The use of intravenous cholangiography in teaching hospitals: A survey

  • Published:
Gastrointestinal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Thirty academic radiology departments active in biliary imaging were surveyed to document how frequently intravenous cholangiography (IVC) was being performed. Over a 10-year period the number of examinations has decreased precipitously from approximately 1728 in 1976 to 8 in 1986. This coincides with the increased availability of alternative procedures. The availability of new contrast agents with improved diagnostic yield and decreased toxicity suggests that its use may have been prematurely abandoned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rholl KS, Smathers RL, McClennan BL, Lee JK: Intravenous cholangiography in the CT era.Gastrointest Radiol 10:69–74, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  2. Eubanks B, Martinez C, Mehigan D, Cameron J: Current role of intravenous cholangiography.Am J Surg 143:731–733, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  3. Goodman MW, Ansel HJ, Vennes J, Lasser R, Silvis S: Is intravenous cholangiography still useful?Gastroenterology 709:642–645, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  4. Daley J, Fitzgerald T, Simpson C: Preoperative intravenous cholangiography as an alternative to routine operative cholangiography in elective cholecystectomy.Clin Radiol 38:161–163, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  5. Alinder G, Nilsson U, Lunderquist A, Herlin P, Holmin T: Preoperative infusion cholangiography compared to routine operative cholangiography at elective cholecystectomy.Br J Surg 73:383–387, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wallers K, McDermott P, James W: Intravenous cholangiography by bolus injection of meglumine iotroxamate and meglumine iodoxamate: a comparative trial of two new contrast media.Clin Radiol 32:457–459, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ott G, Gelfand D: Complications of gastrointestinal radiologic procedures. II. Complications related to biliary tract studies.Gastrointest Radiol 6:47–56, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  8. Shehadi W, Toniollo G: Adverse reactions to contrast media.Radiology 137:299–302, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ansell G: Adverse reactions to contrast agents. Scope of problem.Invest Radiol 5:374–384, 1970

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fork F-T, Nylander G, Olin T: Bilateral Videosignalkommunikation mellan kir. op. och röntgenavd. med digital röntgenbildehandling i samband med peroperative röntgenundersökningar, MAS, Malmö. InProceedings of the 41st Congress of The Nordic Society of Medical Radiology. Oslo, 1983, p 83

  11. Burhenne HJ, Fache JS, Gibney RG, Rowley VA, Becker CD: Biliary lithotripsy by extracorporeal shockwaves: an integral part of nonoperative intervention.AJR 150:1279–1283, 1988

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scott, I.R., Gibney, R.G., Becker, C.D. et al. The use of intravenous cholangiography in teaching hospitals: A survey. Gastrointest Radiol 14, 148–150 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889180

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01889180

Key words

Navigation