This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Kenneth M. Moser, MD; J. R. LeMoine, MD
University of California School of Medicine San Diego

JAMA. 1981;245(8):821-822.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

As Dr Sautter states, others apparently have shared our difficulties in understanding his reported data. We assume their interpretations, like ours, followed careful reading of his article. Even on rereading it now, we have difficulties, so we appreciate his clarifying comments as to what he actually found.

We do, however, stand by our statement that one must be cautious in assessing any study in which leg blind spot is not specified, because this could lead automatically to false-negatives. There are examples in the literature of such a sequence.

As to lysis of venous thrombi between the time of the scan and the phlebogram, we note that Dr Sautter's patients averaged four days between procedures. Presumably, then, some patients were studied substantially beyond four days. Dr Sautter may not think venous thrombus resolution is "reasonable" during a period of four-plus days. However, it can occur. We do agree that . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?