Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 In a message dated 4/25/00 7:14:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, SWATT1@... writes: > This sounds quite reasonable to me but I'm having a tough time actually > documenting " supra " ventricular referable to the brain in any references (even > my Web results refer to only the heart). > *supra* is correct, supraventricular. As per Stedman's Rad/Onc and SEMD as well as typing it all the time. It means above the ventricles, in contrast to rhythms. cma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 This sounds quite reasonable to me but I'm having a tough time actually documenting " supra " ventricular referable to the brain in any references (even my Web results refer to only the heart). In context ... There is no evidence of intra- or extra-axial hemorrhage. There is no evidence of midline shift. There is a region of decreased attenuation within the deep white matter on the right side at the level of the third ventricle. This may represent an evolving infarct. The periventricular and s/l supraventricular decreased attentuation is compatible with microvascular disease. Diffuse global atrophy is noted. All my CTs and MRIs refer to the ventricles so I'm OK with " ventricles " but this is a new doc and the dictation is quite garbled at this point and just want to make sure this is actually what I'm hearing. Thanks for any help on this!! Shel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.