Use of chest sonography in acute-care radiology().

Diagnosis of acute lung disease is a daily challenge for radiologists working in acute-care areas. It is generally based on the results of chest radiography performed under technically unfavorable conditions. Computed tomography (CT) is undoubtedly more accurate in these cases, but it cannot always be performed on critically ill patients who need continuous care.The use of thoracic ultrasonography (US) has recently been proposed for the study of acute lung disease. It can be carried out rapidly at the bedside and does not require any particularly sophisticated equipment. This report analyzes our experience with chest sonography as a supplement to chest radiography in an Emergency Radiology Unit. We performed chest sonography - as an adjunct to chest radiography - on 168 patients with acute chest pathology. Static and dynamic US signs were analyzed in light of radiographic findings and, when possible, CT. The use of chest US improved the authors' ability to provide confident diagnoses of acute disease of the chest and lungs.

Comparison of radiation doses to patients undergoing standard radiographic examinations with conventional screen-film radiography, computed radiography and direct digital radiography.

New flat-panel direct digital radiography equipment has recently been installed in our Accident and Emergency Department; its characteristics and versatility are well suited to the work undertaken in this environment. The aim of this study was to compare radiation doses to patients undergoing standard radiographic examinations using conventional screen-film radiography, computed radiography and direct digital radiography; entrance surface dose and effective dose were calculated for six standard examinations (a total of 10 projections) using standard patient exposure parameters for the three imaging modalities. It was found that doses for computed radiography (all examinations) were higher than the doses for the other two modalities; effective doses for direct digital radiography were approximately 29% and approximately 43% lower than those for screen-film radiography and computed radiography, respectively. The image quality met the criteria in the European guidelines for all modalities.