The use of pre-operative scan prior to neck exploration for XXXX .

@entity1 @entity1136 @entity459 @entity8034 @entity3154 @entity3243 @entity652
A group of @entity1 with diagnosed @entity459 ( @entity459 ) in Auckland between 1982 and 1986 is reviewed. Of the 119 @entity1 , 55 had pre-operative scanning, 36 had no scanning prior to surgery and 29 were managed conservatively. Of the 52 @entity1 who had pre-operative localization with ultrasound scanning, only 27 (52%) had their @entity652 correctly predicted upon neck exploration. Of the 14 @entity1 investigated with @entity3154 and @entity1136 ( @entity8034 ) subtraction scanning, 10 (71%) had their @entity652 positively identified in the predicted locations, whereas the cause of the parathyroid pathology was correctly identified in 33 of the 36 @entity1 (92%) who had surgery alone with no pre-operative scanning. In 11 @entity1 both ultrasound and @entity8034 subtraction scanning were employed. In eight @entity1 the results of the two scanning modalities agreed, and in seven of these eight @entity1 the @entity652 was correctly predicted (six single @entity652 and one with double @entity652 ). In the three @entity1 in whom the results of the two modalities differed, the @entity8034 subtraction scanning correctly predicted the site of the @entity652 in two @entity1 and in the third @entity1 (with a small 223 mg @entity652 ) both modalities were incorrect. Of the six @entity1 with histologically proven @entity3243 , only three had pre-operative localization with ultrasound alone, and all three had incorrect predictions (one false positive for @entity652 , and two false negative scans). Overall the results cast doubt over the usefulness of pre-operative scanning as a routine investigation prior to initial neck exploration for @entity459 .(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
