Sachiyo Inamura1, Fumio Tsujimoto2, Takanori Okamura2, Masaru Sakurai2, Shinichi Nakaya3, Osamu Ishii3, Sachihiko Nobuoka2, Takahide Matsuda3. 1. Department of General Internal Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, 216-8511, Japan. s2inamura@marianna-u.ac.jp. 2. Ultrasound Center, Department of Laboratory Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, 216-8511, Japan. 3. Department of General Internal Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, 216-8511, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Digital video recording of dynamic images is a potential way to improve the reproducibility of abdominal ultrasonography (US). Static US and dynamic US were compared using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) as a reference standard, and the value of stored video images was verified. METHODS: The subjects were 120 individuals who had undergone CE-CT ≤1 month before undergoing US. After static US, dynamic US was carried out according to the Scanning Procedure for Abdominal Ultrasonography described in this paper, and records of 30 separate scans were saved on digital video discs (DVD) as individual video files for interpretation. The findings from static US and dynamic US were compared. RESULTS: With respect to the abdominal US signs covered in this evaluation, dynamic US achieved a detection rate equivalent to or better than that of static US. Detection rates were significantly more frequent on dynamic US for: enlarged hepatic hilum lymph nodes (P < 0.001); gallbladder wall thickness (P < 0.01); cystic lesions of the liver, bright liver, and splenomegaly (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Dynamic US is a valuable tool because it enables repeated evaluation of target organs with playback speed adjustment.
PURPOSE: Digital video recording of dynamic images is a potential way to improve the reproducibility of abdominal ultrasonography (US). Static US and dynamic US were compared using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) as a reference standard, and the value of stored video images was verified. METHODS: The subjects were 120 individuals who had undergone CE-CT ≤1 month before undergoing US. After static US, dynamic US was carried out according to the Scanning Procedure for Abdominal Ultrasonography described in this paper, and records of 30 separate scans were saved on digital video discs (DVD) as individual video files for interpretation. The findings from static US and dynamic US were compared. RESULTS: With respect to the abdominal US signs covered in this evaluation, dynamic US achieved a detection rate equivalent to or better than that of static US. Detection rates were significantly more frequent on dynamic US for: enlarged hepatic hilum lymph nodes (P < 0.001); gallbladder wall thickness (P < 0.01); cystic lesions of the liver, bright liver, and splenomegaly (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Dynamic US is a valuable tool because it enables repeated evaluation of target organs with playback speed adjustment.
Authors: T Maeda; Y Hori; N Yamaguchi; H Mori; H Hata; Y Yamada; R Tanaka; H Kiyosue; H Takaki Journal: Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi Date: 1995-03