You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 111 No. 1, January 1963 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (12)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Radiologic Evaluation of Heart Size in Rheumatic Heart Disease

Studies in Young Patients

JULIAN FRIEDEN, M.D.; JEROME H. SHAPIRO, M.D.; ALVAN R. FEINSTEIN, M.D.

Arch Intern Med. 1963;111(1):44-50.

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

The determination of heart size is essential for ' evaluating prognosis and the need for physical limitations after an acute attack of rheumatic fever. Of the available simple techniques for measuring cardiac size, radiography is more sensitive than physical examination and is, in rheumatic heart disease, more generally useful than electrocardiography. However, radiologic examination of the heart has certain major disadvantages: (1) Measurements of the cardiac silhouette may often be affected by physiologic factors and do not provide a sharp demarcation between normal and abnormal; (2) quantitation of chamber size is done subjectively, and (3) fluoroscopy, which is usually considered better than films for assessing the effects of respiration or of cardiac contraction, is undesirable because of the need for increased radiation1,2 and the lack of a permanent record.

Despite these disadvantages, radiography continues to be the major clinical technique for appraisal of heart size. The present work was done . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

NEW YORK

Associate Attending Physician, Division of Medicine, Montefiore Hospital, and Instructor in Medicine, Columbia University, New York (Dr. Frieden); Attending Physician, Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Montefiore Hospital, and Associate Clinical Professor of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine (Dr. Shapiro); formerly, Medical Director, Irvington House, and Assistant Professor of Medicine, New York University of Medicine, present address: Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn. (Dr. Feinstein).; From Irvington House, Irvington-on-Hudson, New York; The Departments of Medicine and Radiology, Montefiore Hospital, Bronx, N.Y., and The Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York.


Footnotes

Submitted for publication May 15, 1962; accepted July 12.

Supported in part by grants from Parke Davis and Company and The National Heart Institute (H 1595 C7), American Heart Association, and New York Heart Association.



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





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1963 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.