Hemoperitoneum may occur in various emergent conditions. In the trauma setting, evidence of intraperitoneal blood depicted at computed tomography (CT) should lead the radiologist to conduct a careful search of images for the injured visceral organ (the liver or spleen). Specific CT signs, such as a sentinel clot or extravasation of intravascular contrast material, may indicate the source of bleeding and help direct management. In addition, the configuration of accumulated blood may help identify the injured organ; for example, triangular fluid collections are observed in the mesentery most often in the setting of bowel or mesenteric injury. Less commonly, hemoperitoneum may have a nontraumatic origin. Iatrogenic hemoperitoneum may occur as a complication of surgery or other interventional procedures in the abdominal cavity or as a result of anticoagulation therapy. Hemoperitoneum also may be seen in the setting of blood dyscrasias such as hemophilia and polycythemia vera. Tumor-associated hemorrhage, which most often occurs in hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatic adenoma, or vascular metastatic disease, also may produce hemoperitoneum. Other potential causes of nontraumatic hemoperitoneum are gynecologic conditions such as hemorrhage or rupture of an ovarian cyst and rupture of the gestational sac in ectopic pregnancy, and hepatic hematoma in syndromic hemolysis with elevated liver enzymes and low platelet count (HELLP syndrome). Vascular lesions (visceral artery aneurysms and pseudoaneurysms) that occur in systemic vascular diseases such as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome or in pancreatitis are another less common source of hemoperitoneum.

is an essential component of nearly all diagnostic US procedures. In this era of increased awareness of the effects of ionizing radiation and the side effects of iodine-and gadolinium-based contrast agents, Doppler US is poised to play an even bigger role in medical imaging. It is safe, cost-effective, portable, and highly accurate when performed by an experienced operator. The sensitivities and specificities of Doppler US for detecting blood flow and determining the direction and velocity of blood flow in various organs and vascular systems have increased dramatically in the past decade. With use of advanced flow techniques that are available for use with most modern equipment, US can provide vascular information that is comparable to or even more accurate than that obtained with other cross-sectional and interventional modalities. However, there remains concern that US (including newer more advanced flow-evaluating techniques) will not be used to its full potential owing to dependence on operator skill and expertise. Thorough understanding of image optimization techniques and expanded knowledge of the physical principles, instrumentation, application, advantages, and limitations of this modality are of utmost importance. The authors provide a simple practical guide for optimizing images for vascular flow detection by reviewing various cases and focusing on the parameters that should be optimized.

OBJECTIVES There are limited data comparing imaging modalities in the diagnosis of pancreas divisum. We aimed to: 1. Evaluate the sensitivity of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for pancreas divisum. 2. Assess interobserver agreement (IOA) among expert radiologists for detecting pancreas divisum on MDCT and MRCP. METHODS For this retrospective cohort study, we identified 45 consecutive patients with pancreaticobiliary symptoms and pancreas divisum established by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) who underwent EUS and cross-sectional imaging. The control group was composed of patients without pancreas divisum who underwent ERP and cross-sectional imaging. RESULTS The sensitivity of EUS for pancreas divisum was 86.7%, significantly higher than sensitivity reported in the medical records for MDCT (15.5%) or MRCP (60%) [p<0.001 for each]. On review by expert radiologists the sensitivity of MDCT increased to 83.3% in cases where the pancreatic duct was visualized, with fair IOA (қ=0.34). Expert review of MRCPs did not identify any additional cases of pancreas divisum; IOA was moderate (қ=0.43). CONCLUSIONS EUS is a sensitive test for diagnosing pancreas divisum and is superior to MDCT and MRCP. Review of MDCT studies by expert radiologists substantially raises its sensitivity for pancreas divisum.