HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content

Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:30-31
© 1995 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Discussion

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

	Introduction

 
See also page 27.

DR THOMAS R. J. TODD (Toronto, Ontario, Canada): That was very nice; those are very beautiful pictures. I think that the major advantage of the helical CT and the subsequent reconstruction over standard CT is not going to be so much defining the external extent of the growth or the stricture, because we are going to get that from a standard CT, but rather in more accurately delineating the length of involved airway as you plan for subsequent surgical intervention. The gold standard for that is clearly, I would think, bronchoscopic evaluation and measuring of the airway. Did you compare the actual length of airway involvement on helical CT versus what you obtained by accurate measurements of the involvement at rigid bronchoscopy?

DR WHYTE: That is a very good question, and we did try to do that. In some cases we were able to correlate the bronchoscopic length of stenosis with the radiographic length. This was easiest when either myself or one of my partners did the bronchoscopy. In some cases we relied on the bronchoscopy of a pulmonologist, or in . . . [Full Text of this Article]