Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Pearls and Pitfalls in Hepatic Ultrasonography

Pearls and Pitfalls in Hepatic Ultrasonography Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/ultrasound-quarterly by BhDMf5ePHKbH4TTImqenVA5KvPVPZ0P5BEgU+IUTEfzO/GUWifn2IfwcEVVH9SSn on 06/10/2020 REVIEW ARTICLE David S. Shin, BS, R. Brooke Jeffrey, MD, and Terry S. Desser, MD sensitivity of those studies that reported greater than 85% Abstract: Ultrasonography is often the initial imaging study in pa- specificity was 55% for US, 72% for CT, 76% for MRI, and tients who present with right upper quadrant abdominal complaints. 3 90% for positron emission tomography (PET). However, due to its intrinsic technical limitations, ultrasonography The relatively low diagnostic accuracy in detecting ma- generally has a lower sensitivity than contrast-enhanced computed lignant focal hepatic lesions by US often prompts the use of tomography or magnetic resonance imaging in detecting hepatic CT, MRI, and/or PET, especially in patients with known chronic lesions. In this review, we describe several subtle sonographic signs liver disease or underlying malignancy (ie, those with a high that suggest the presence of an otherwise inconspicuous focal liver pretest probability). Ultrasonography also has a limited field of lesion, including disease in the pleural space or the lung parenchyma, view that is constrained by the size, shape, and frequency of the refractive edge shadows, distorted or absent venous landmarks, ab- transducer, which precludes visualization of the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Ultrasound quarterly Wolters Kluwer Health

Pearls and Pitfalls in Hepatic Ultrasonography

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters-kluwer-health/pearls-and-pitfalls-in-hepatic-ultrasonography-VChwPBTxsc

References (24)

Publisher
Wolters Kluwer Health
ISSN
0894-8771
eISSN
1536-0253
DOI
10.1097/RUQ.0b013e3181ce1537
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/ultrasound-quarterly by BhDMf5ePHKbH4TTImqenVA5KvPVPZ0P5BEgU+IUTEfzO/GUWifn2IfwcEVVH9SSn on 06/10/2020 REVIEW ARTICLE David S. Shin, BS, R. Brooke Jeffrey, MD, and Terry S. Desser, MD sensitivity of those studies that reported greater than 85% Abstract: Ultrasonography is often the initial imaging study in pa- specificity was 55% for US, 72% for CT, 76% for MRI, and tients who present with right upper quadrant abdominal complaints. 3 90% for positron emission tomography (PET). However, due to its intrinsic technical limitations, ultrasonography The relatively low diagnostic accuracy in detecting ma- generally has a lower sensitivity than contrast-enhanced computed lignant focal hepatic lesions by US often prompts the use of tomography or magnetic resonance imaging in detecting hepatic CT, MRI, and/or PET, especially in patients with known chronic lesions. In this review, we describe several subtle sonographic signs liver disease or underlying malignancy (ie, those with a high that suggest the presence of an otherwise inconspicuous focal liver pretest probability). Ultrasonography also has a limited field of lesion, including disease in the pleural space or the lung parenchyma, view that is constrained by the size, shape, and frequency of the refractive edge shadows, distorted or absent venous landmarks, ab- transducer, which precludes visualization of the

Journal

Ultrasound quarterlyWolters Kluwer Health

Published: Mar 1, 2010

There are no references for this article.