TY - JOUR
T1 - Do we really need plain and soft-tissue radiographies to detect radiolucent foreign bodies in the ED?
AU - Turkcuer, Ibrahim
AU - Atilla, Ridvan
AU - Topacoglu, Hakan
AU - Yanturali, Sedat
AU - Kiyan, Selahattin
AU - Kabakci, Neslihan
AU - Bozkurt, Seyran
AU - Cevik, Arif Alper
PY - 2006/11
Y1 - 2006/11
N2 - Objective: The objective of this study was to compare 3 imaging techniques-plain radiography, soft-tissue radiography, and ultrasonography-in detecting nonradiopaque foreign bodies in soft tissue. Methods: In this randomized, blinded, and descriptive in vitro study, 40 chicken thighs with 2 types of nonradiopaque foreign bodies (wood and rubber) and 40 chicken thighs as part of a control group were evaluated to detect soft-tissue foreign bodies with plain radiography, soft-tissue radiography, and high-frequency ultrasonography. Results: The overall sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive predictive and negative predictive values of plain radiography for both nonradiopaque foreign bodies were 5%, 90%, 33%, and 48%, respectively; those of soft-tissue radiography for both nonradiopaque foreign bodies were 5%, 90%, 33%, and 48%, respectively; and those of ultrasonography for both nonradiopaque foreign bodies were 90%, 80%, 81%, and 89%, respectively. Conclusions: In this experimental model, the results show that high-frequency ultrasonography is superior to plain and soft-tissue radiographies and that the latter 2 techniques are similarly poor at detecting nonradiopaque foreign bodies.
AB - Objective: The objective of this study was to compare 3 imaging techniques-plain radiography, soft-tissue radiography, and ultrasonography-in detecting nonradiopaque foreign bodies in soft tissue. Methods: In this randomized, blinded, and descriptive in vitro study, 40 chicken thighs with 2 types of nonradiopaque foreign bodies (wood and rubber) and 40 chicken thighs as part of a control group were evaluated to detect soft-tissue foreign bodies with plain radiography, soft-tissue radiography, and high-frequency ultrasonography. Results: The overall sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive predictive and negative predictive values of plain radiography for both nonradiopaque foreign bodies were 5%, 90%, 33%, and 48%, respectively; those of soft-tissue radiography for both nonradiopaque foreign bodies were 5%, 90%, 33%, and 48%, respectively; and those of ultrasonography for both nonradiopaque foreign bodies were 90%, 80%, 81%, and 89%, respectively. Conclusions: In this experimental model, the results show that high-frequency ultrasonography is superior to plain and soft-tissue radiographies and that the latter 2 techniques are similarly poor at detecting nonradiopaque foreign bodies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750630756&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750630756&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajem.2006.03.013
DO - 10.1016/j.ajem.2006.03.013
M3 - Article
C2 - 17098094
AN - SCOPUS:33750630756
VL - 24
SP - 763
EP - 768
JO - American Journal of Emergency Medicine
JF - American Journal of Emergency Medicine
SN - 0735-6757
IS - 7
ER -