OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of conventional radiography and ultrasonography (US) for the diagnosis of suspected bone fractures. METHOD: Eighty-six patients were assessed using conventional radiography and US on the affected bone district. RESULTS: Radiographic and sonographic findings were concordant in 93% of cases. In one case, US suggested a fracture not seen on radiographic assessment. Ultrasonography showed a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specificity of 0.92. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, US could become the first diagnostic approach.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of conventional radiography and ultrasonography (US) for the diagnosis of suspected bone fractures. METHOD: Eighty-six patients were assessed using conventional radiography and US on the affected bone district. RESULTS: Radiographic and sonographic findings were concordant in 93% of cases. In one case, US suggested a fracture not seen on radiographic assessment. Ultrasonography showed a sensitivity of 0.94 and a specificity of 0.92. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, US could become the first diagnostic approach.
Authors: Djoke Douma-den Hamer; Marco H Blanker; Mireille A Edens; Lonneke N Buijteweg; Martijn F Boomsma; Sven H van Helden; Gert-Jan Mauritz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 3.240