JUM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vincoff, N. S.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstein, R. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vincoff, N. S.
Right arrow Articles by Goldstein, R. B.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 18, Issue 12 799-803, Copyright © 1999 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Effect of ultrasound transducer frequency on the appearance of the fetal bowel

N. S. Vincoff, P. W. Callen, R. Smith-Bindman and R. B. Goldstein
Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco 94143, USA.

We evaluated how ultrasound transducer frequency affected the appearance of the fetal bowel. One hundred women with singleton pregnancies, who were undergoing routine ultrasonographic examination, were assessed at a single institution. Patients with known fetal anomalies, abnormal biochemical screening results, or a history of cystic fibrosis were excluded. Images of the fetal abdomen were obtained in all patients using a single multi-Hertz transducer, with transducer frequencies set at 5 MHz and 8 MHz. Images were read separately by two radiologists, blinded to patient name and transducer frequency. Observers rated the presence or absence of echogenic bowel, defined as bowel with echogenicity greater than or equal to that of adjacent bone. Using the 8 MHz frequency, the radiologists interpreted 31% of the cases as having echogenic bowel, whereas using the 5 MHz frequency, the radiologists interpreted only 3% of the cases as having echogenic bowel (P<0.0001). A fetus was 10 times as likely to be given a diagnosis of echogenic bowel by both observers when the 8 MHz transducer was used than when the 5 MHz transducer was used by one observer (relative risk 10, 95% CI 3-11). Furthermore, using the 8 MHz frequency transducer, at least one of the radiologists interpreted echogenic bowel in 62% of the cases. We concluded that echogenic fetal bowel is a very common observation when imaging is performed with an 8 MHz transducer, and thus echogenic bowel diagnosed with an 8 MHz transducer is unlikely to reflect underlying abnormality. Identification of echogenic bowel with an 8 MHz transducer should not prompt further testing.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
A. McNamara and D. Levine
Intraabdominal Fetal Echogenic Masses: A Practical Guide to Diagnosis and Management
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2005; 25(3): 633 - 645.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Med. Genet.Home page
V Scotet, M De Braekeleer, M-P Audrezet, I Quere, B Mercier, I Dugueperoux, J Andrieux, M Blayau, and C Ferec
Prenatal detection of cystic fibrosis by ultrasonography: a retrospective study of more than 346 000 pregnancies
J. Med. Genet., June 1, 2002; 39(6): 443 - 448.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
M. Levental, D. H. Pretorius, A. L. Scioscia, K. Jundi, D. Wallace, and N. E. Budorick
Prenatal Detection of Echogenic Bowel in a Fetus With Familial Microvillous Atrophy
J. Ultrasound Med., March 1, 2002; 21(3): 351 - 354.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.