Conventional vs invert-grayscale X-ray for diagnosis of pneumothorax in the emergency setting.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumothorax is a pathologic condition in which air is accumulated between the visceral and parietal pleura. After clinical suspicion, in order to diagnose the severity of the condition, imaging is necessary. By using the help of Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS) direct conventional X-rays are converted to gray-scale and this has become a preferred method among many physicians. METHODS: Our study design was a case-control study with cross-over design study. Posterior-anterior chest X-rays of patients were evaluated for pneumothorax by 10 expert physicians with at least 3years of experience and who have used inverted gray-scale posterior anterior chest X-ray for diagnosing pneumothorax. RESULTS: The study included posterior anterior chest X-ray images of 268 patients of which 106 were diagnosed with spontaneous pneumothorax and 162 patients used as a control group. The sensitivity of Digital-conventional X-rays was found to be higher than that of inverted gray-scale images (95% CI (2,08-5,04), p<0,01). There was no statistically significant difference between the gold standard and digital-conventional images (95% CI (0,45-2,17), p=0,20), while the evaluations of the gray-scale images were found to be less sensitive for diagnosis (95% CI (3,16-5,67) p<0,01). CONCLUSION: Inverted gray-scale imaging is not a superior imaging modality over digital-conventional X-ray for the diagnosis of pneumothorax. Prospective studies should be performed where diagnostic potency of inverted gray-scale radiograms is tested against gold standard chest CT. Further research should compare inverted grayscale to lung ultrasound to assess them as alternatives prior to CT.

The accuracy of ultrasound evaluation in foot and ankle trauma.

OBJECTIVES: Foot and ankle injuries that result in sprains or fractures are commonly encountered at the emergency department. The purpose of the present study is to find out the accuracy of ultrasound (US) scanning in injuries in the aforementioned areas. METHODS: Ottawa Ankle Rules-positive patients older than 16 years who presented to the emergency department with foot or ankle injuries were eligible. For all patients, US evaluation of the whole foot and ankle was performed by an emergency physician before radiographic imaging. All radiographic images were evaluated by an orthopedic specialist and compared with the interpretations of the US. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-one patients were included in the study. Radiographic evaluation enabled the determination of fractures in 20 patients, and all of these were identified with US imaging. Moreover, US evaluation radiographically detected a silent ankle fracture in 1 patient. The sensitivity of US scanning in detecting fractures was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 83.8-100), the specificity was 99.1% (95% CI, 95-99.8), the positive predictive value was 95.2% (95% CI, 89.6-98), and the negative predictive value was 100% (95% CI, 96.4-100), respectively. The most common fractures were detected at the lateral malleolus and at the basis of the fifth metatarsal. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound imaging permits the evaluation of foot and ankle fractures. Because it is a highly sensitive technique, US can be performed in the emergency department with confidence.