@entity1462 can usually be diagnosed on clinical grounds. They have a well-defined appearance on magnetic resonance imaging, which can effectively determine their tissue and flow characteristics. However, the role of cross-sectional imaging in the management of @entity1462 is not well defined. Most reviews suggest that magnetic resonance imaging should be reserved for cases in which the extent of the lesion cannot be estimated on physical examination. However, to date no group has compared the accuracy of physical examination alone to that of magnetic resonance imaging in determining this extent. A review was performed of all the @entity1 evaluated for @entity1462 at the New York University Trunk and Extremity @entity455 Conference between July of 1994 and August of 1999. @entity1 who underwent magnetic resonance evaluation at other institutions and whose images were not available for review were excluded. All study @entity1 either underwent magnetic resonance imaging examination at New York University Medical Center or had outside films reviewed at the center. The physical examination findings were compared with the magnetic resonance findings and the surgeon and radiologist made a joint decision about whether there was a correlation between the magnetic resonance and physical examination findings. Fifty-eight @entity1 met the study criteria, 44 (76 percent) of whom were found to have more extensive disease on magnetic resonance examination than appreciated on physical examination. Of the 51 @entity1 with low- @entity1462 ( @entity455 , @entity600 , and @entity600 ), 39 (76 percent) had more extensive disease on magnetic resonance examination than on physical examination. Of the seven @entity1 with high-flow @entity2758 , five had more extensive disease on magnetic resonance. In all of the 44 @entity1 whose magnetic resonance imaging findings did not correlate with those of the physical examination, therapeutic decision making was affected. Contrary to the conventional wisdom of published reviews, physical examination findings significantly underestimated the extent of @entity1462 in the majority of cases. Magnetic resonance imaging should be performed in all @entity1 with @entity1462 of the trunk and extremities before therapy is planned. In an age when physicians are asked to justify their decisions, especially where the use of expensive diagnostic modalities is concerned, the situations in which these tests are indispensable must be clearly defined or else @entity1 will be denied access to them.

The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of XXXX of the trunk and extremities.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['Patients', 'patients'] @entity455 :: ('MESH:D014652', 'Disease') :: ['Vascular Anomalies', 'venous vascular malformations'] @entity2758 :: ('MESH:D001165', 'Disease') :: ['arteriovenous malformations'] @entity600 :: ('MESH:D000014', 'Disease') :: ['lymphatic malformations', 'capillary malformations'] @entity1462 :: ('MESH:D054079', 'Disease') :: ['flow vascular malformations', 'vascular malformations', 'Vascular malformations']
@entity1462 :: (MESH:D054079,Disease) :: ['vascular malformations']
