Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Skeletal Radiol ; 28(10): 594-8, 1999 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10550539

RESUMO

A case of pathologically proven extraskeletal osteochondroma is presented with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), bone scan and radiographic findings. The diagnosis of extraskeletal osteochondroma should be considered when a discrete, ossified mass is localized in the soft tissues of the distal extremities. Nomenclature surrounding this entity is controversial and is discussed.


Assuntos
Doenças do Pé/diagnóstico , Osteocondroma/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de Tecidos Moles/diagnóstico , Adolescente , Doenças do Pé/patologia , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Osteocondroma/patologia , Neoplasias de Tecidos Moles/patologia , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X
2.
J Am Board Fam Pract ; 9(6): 414-7, 1996.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8923399

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We wanted to compare an ultrasound examination with the bone scintiscan to diagnose stress fractures. METHODS: Using the bone scintiscan as the reference standard, we conducted a prospective, double-blind study of 78 patients (87 percent were men, mean age 24 years) referred for bone scintiscan to rule out tibial stress fractures. After the participants were injected with radionuclide, we examined each tibia once using ultrasound adjusted for an active intensity of 2.0 W/cm2 and again with the wand turned off. The patient was blinded to the mode used. The patient's response to the ultrasound was considered positive if the patient reported pain as the wand passed over the tibia. A bone scintiscan was considered positive according to the criteria of Zwas. One sonography technician performed all examinations; both he and the nuclear medicine department were blinded to the other's findings. The final results were tabulated by a third, uninvolved party. A positive correlation between the scintiscan and ultrasound examination consisted of pain with active ultrasound and any degree of stress fracture in any part of the same tibia as found on the bone scintiscan. RESULTS: Thirty-five stress fractures were found on bone scintiscan, whereas only 15 were detected by ultrasound examination (sensitivity 43 percent). With ultrasound testing there were 22 false positives (specificity 49 percent) and 20 false negatives. These findings resulted in a positive predictive value of 41 percent and a negative predictive value of 51 percent. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound is not reliable in the diagnosis of tibial stress fractures. Bone scintiscan remains the test of choice.


Assuntos
Fraturas de Estresse/diagnóstico por imagem , Fraturas da Tíbia/diagnóstico por imagem , Adulto , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Militares , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Prospectivos , Cintilografia , Fatores de Tempo , Ultrassonografia , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...