scholarly journals Radial Artery of the Upper Extremity

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Author(s):  
Scott R. Levin ◽  
Sarah J. Carlson ◽  
Alik Farber ◽  
Jeffrey A. Kalish ◽  
Elizabeth G. King ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joann M. Lohr ◽  
Douglas S. Paget ◽  
J. Michael Smith ◽  
Jennifer L. Winkler ◽  
Alan R. Wladis

2011 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 78-79
Author(s):  
Johnny Franco ◽  
Jonathon Pollack ◽  
Lauren Davies ◽  
Michael Fallucco ◽  
Matthew Nykiel ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (04) ◽  
pp. 581-584
Author(s):  
Natalie H. Vaughn ◽  
Donald J. Flemming ◽  
Jordan M. Newell ◽  
Alexander H. Payatakes

Upper extremity adventitial cystic disease is rare, but the characteristic findings of this lesion should be known to the hand surgeon and used to guide treatment. We present a case of a young adult male who developed a painless mass in his distal forearm. Diagnostic imaging workup revealed a cystic mass that extended within and encased the radial artery. Both MRI and direct intraoperative visualization confirmed the presence of a stalk connecting the intra-mural radial artery mass to the radiocarpal joint. The mass and stalk were excised en bloc with fenestration of the volar capsule to prevent recurrence. This case demonstrates a less common example of upper extremity adventitial cystic disease and supports the articular theory of origin of these lesions. When surgical excision is performed, an attempt should be made to identify and excise the articular stalk in an effort to minimize risk of recurrence.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-53
Author(s):  
Munetaka Kita ◽  
Takashi Konishi ◽  
Yuto Konishi ◽  
Taihei Hino ◽  
Daisuke Yamamoto ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 1316-1317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitsumasa Hata ◽  
Alexander Rosalion ◽  
Siven Seevanayagam ◽  
Kazuhiro Kohch ◽  
Brian F Buxton

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4, 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract To account for the effects of multiple impairments, evaluating physicians must provide a summary value that combines multiple impairments so the whole person impairment is equal to or less than the sum of all the individual impairment values. A common error is to add values that should be combined and typically results in an inflated rating. The Combined Values Chart in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, includes instructions that guide physicians about combining impairment ratings. For example, impairment values within a region generally are combined and converted to a whole person permanent impairment before combination with the results from other regions (exceptions include certain impairments of the spine and extremities). When they combine three or more values, physicians should select and combine the two lowest values; this value is combined with the third value to yield the total value. Upper extremity impairment ratings are combined based on the principle that a second and each succeeding impairment applies not to the whole unit (eg, whole finger) but only to the part that remains (eg, proximal phalanx). Physicians who combine lower extremity impairments usually use only one evaluation method, but, if more than one method is used, the physician should use the Combined Values Chart.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document