Skip Navigation

European Journal of Echocardiography 2007 8(6):418-419; doi:10.1016/j.euje.2007.07.011
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Soliman, O. I.I.
Right arrow Articles by ten Cate, F. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Soliman, O. I.I.
Right arrow Articles by ten Cate, F. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © 2007, The European Society of Cardiology

Response to the letter to the editor

Osama I.I. Soliman*, Marcel L. Geleijnse and Folkert J. ten Cate

Department of Cardiology, Thoraxcenter, Erasmus MC, ‘s-Gravendijkwal 230, 3015 CE Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Received 21 July 2007; .

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 10 4635994; fax: +31 10 4635498. o.soliman@erasmusmc.nl f.j.tencate@erasmusmc.nl

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

We thank Dr. Saura for the interest in our work. Dr. Saura raised an important issue regarding the preferred venous route of contrast administration during bubble studies for assessment of a patent foramen ovale (PFO). In the vast majority of published literature and more relevant in clinical practice an antecubital venous . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?