spine ultrasound

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I have a young female pt who got in a fender bender and her chiro sent her for a cervical to coccyx US which was conducted and read by a radiologist. The report said she had "joint inflammation." No levels of specific joints were given. Just "joint inflammation."
 
I have a young female pt who got in a fender bender and her chiro sent her for a cervical to coccyx US which was conducted and read by a radiologist. The report said she had "joint inflammation." No levels of specific joints were given. Just "joint inflammation."

chiro sent her for a cervical to coccyx US which was conducted and read by a radiologist.

"chiropractic radiologist" i would presume?
 
Nope...I googled him. MSK radiologist.

Also just think about the logistics of that study. The dictation of findings, keeping track of the level you're looking at and remembering if this is L2 or L3, bilaterally doing the scan means you're going across midline at each level or straight down the right side and then straight down the left...

So many Q.
 
I don't see the utility of doing and ultrasound for a C->S diagnostic purposes. An U/S will never show the level of detail of an MRI or CT scan. Highly subject to user error, and high likelihood of difficulty of identifying the level of pathology. U/S is for soft tissues not superior for bony structures.
 
This study is an excellent depiction of optimal visualization of soft tissue structures (nicely labeled) and some bony structures. It is more of an anatomical normal anatomy structural ultrasound survey that was performed by frequently changing from curved to linear array probes, and was not designed to demonstrate pathological aberrations. The utility of the study is perhaps to serve as a springboard for pathology ultrasound studies in the future, but the technology needs improvement (even though these are superb images) in order to detect spinal pathology.
 
Top