Ultrasound – The Gold Standard?

Even with advances in technology, ultrasound can never be a gold standard for medical testing. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a gold standard is something set up as an example against which others of the same type are compared.

BalanceScaleUneven

There are multiple diagnostic imaging modalities for the diagnosis of disease. While there may be more than one modality that can diagnose a certain disease, every modality has its functions that it is best suited for.

X-ray

X-ray

An X-ray is a test using x-ray beams to create images. An x-ray is used to evaluate for bone fractures, lung conditions, breast cancer, bone cancer, and swallowed items. In some people a contrast is needed for clear imaging.

CT scan

CT scan

Computed tomography is a stronger version of an x-ray that is able to visualize all parts of the body. In a rather grotesque visual, imagine looking down on someone and cutting and removing horizontal slices from the head to feet and viewing each slice separately as an image. This is essentially what CT accomplishes. It can locate broken bones, brain hemorrhages, internal bleeding, infection, heart disease, and blood clots.

Preoperative venography: medial compression of the popliteal vein in varicose vein recurrence.

Preoperative venography: medial compression of the popliteal vein in varicose vein recurrence.

A venogram is another version of X-Ray using contrast solution to visualize the veins in the body. Ascending venography is used to diagnose deep vein thrombosis (its most common use) and descending venography is used to evaluate the function of the valves in the veins.  Venography is an invasive procedure requiring an IV line for the contrast solution.

angiography of the hand

angiography of the hand

Angiography is similar to venography aside from the obvious fact: one test looks at veins and one looks at arteries. An angiography is used to locate narrowing or blockages in the arteries. Also considered invasive, an IV line must be inserted to apply the contrast solution.

MRI machine

MRI machine

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) creates images using a magnetic field and radio waves. It is best used to analyze the brain and spinal chord. It is also used to evaluate tendons and ligaments. The CT and MRI machines look very similar, however, they are very different in what they do. CT uses an x-ray beam whereas an MRI uses a magnetic field. They both require the patient to lie very still for long periods of time in a claustrophobic type environment. A contrast solution may be necessary for good visualization. Both CT and MRI have specific uses in which they have the best imaging quality.

Ultrasound…the final and most important part.

As stated in the above video, ultrasound uses high frequency sound waves to penetrate the body. The sound waves bounce back and create an image. This exam is typically not painful and noninvasive. There are several modalities of diagnostic ultrasound including but not limited to abdominal (evaluates organs and other areas in the abdominal region), vascular (evaluates arteries and veins throughout the entire body), cardiac (evaluates the heart, its valves, and function), and obstetric (evaluates the unborn fetus).

As far back as 1988, when diagnostic ultrasound was an up and coming technology, Roy Filly described ultrasound as “the stethoscope of the future“. The stethoscope was once used for many functions and to diagnose many diseases, however, many people in the medical field are completely unaware and untrained as to what it can all be used for. At a time when diagnostic ultrasound was uncommonly used and only for very basic things, Dr. Filly realized that it was headed in the same direction as the stethoscope had. He stated, “…sonography truly is the next stethoscope: used by many, understood by few.” Most emergency rooms and intensive care units (ICU) have small ultrasound machines for the doctors use. Unfortunately many of these doctors barely have a basic understanding of how ultrasound works and what they are looking for.

Used by many, understood by few.

While X-Ray and CT do not require the technologist to be able to diagnose the images they are acquiring, diagnostic ultrasound sonographers must be able to recognize and locate the pathology they are looking for. In the Best Practice and Research Clinical Anaesthesiology Journal, James C.R. Rippey and Alistair G. Royse discuss the use of diagnostic ultrasound in trauma. For emergency medicine residents, the amount of training includes an academic course and 200 scans. While this is adequate for doctors, the authors realized and stated that ultrasound is an operator dependent modality and to diagnose more severe diseases it should be performed by an ultrasound sonographer with extensive experience.

The training required for diagnostic ultrasound is 2 to 4 years of extensive schooling including classes such as ultrasound physics, medical terminology, hemodynamics, anatomy, and many more plus hands-on lab time. The course is finished with a seven to nine month clinical internship.

challenges

The limitations of diagnostic ultrasound are a main factor preventing it from becoming a gold standard in medical testing. Obesity is a primary restriction to ultrasound that is not easily fixed. The sound waves attenuate (lose power) the further distance they have to travel causing the object being imaged to either be poorly visualized or not visualized at all. Extensive edema (swelling) causes similar issues. Janet Cochrane Miller wrote a journal article in the Radiology Rounds newsletter in 2005 based on her research of how obesity affects diagnostic imaging modalities. The percentage of diagnostic ultrasound studies that were limited by obesity was 2%. The next highest modality affected by obesity was chest X-Ray at 0.5%.

Another limitation is the ability of the patient to tolerate the exam. Some patients are in extreme pain and are unable to handle the slight pushing of the ultrasound probe needed to produce clear images. In a study done by multiple doctors from the American College of Emergency Physicians on Ultrasound for Appendicitis, severe pain or abdominal guarding was a limitation of diagnostic ultrasound for the diagnosis of appendicitis. Abdominal guarding causes the patient to have a rigid abdomen preventing the sonographer from receiving optimal visualization. This limitation can sometimes be avoided by using different methods, however, it can still prevent the sonographer from getting the necessary images.

Orthopedic external fixators or dressings are also a limitation as ultrasound needs direct skin contact (aside from the gel) in order to send and receive sound waves. This limitation can also be easily avoided by removal of the dressing, however this is not always a possible solution as some surgical dressings cannot be removed. With removal of the dressing, direct contact to the wound (with the use of a sterile probe cover) may cause more pain than the patient can tolerate.

With abdominal ultrasound, bowel gas is a limitation that a very experienced sonographer may be able to avoid, however, it is difficult and sometimes impossible. Bowel gas can distort the sound waves giving an inaccurate image or completely obstruct the view.

Bowel gas causing color Doppler artifact

Bowel gas causing color Doppler artifact

Artery calcification in vascular ultrasound may reflect the sound waves and prevent the sonographer from receiving a complete and accurate image. A vascular ultrasound specific exam, ankle-brachial index, is especially limited by artery calcification. Ankle-brachial indices is the blood pressure at the ankle, divided by the blood pressure in the arm. This number is an indication of the arterial insufficiency in the leg. Calcification (caused mostly by diabetes) causes the artery to not compress, creating an abnormally high and inaccurate pressure.

Calcified plaque in an artery creating acoustic shadowing.

Calcified plaque in an artery creating acoustic shadowing.

Quantity versus quality is a problem seen in many hospitals and clinics nationwide as determined in the Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography in 1985. The demand for ultrasound exams is so high that the sonographers have a very limited amount of time to perform a large quantity of studies. This causes the studies to be rushed and increases the chance for mistakes. Quality Assurance is (or should be) used in all diagnostic medical testing facilities. A majority of labs will perform quality assurance monthly in that a couple random exams will be discussed and looked over. This creates an awareness for the sonographers to keep their exams up to par. It is also a good learning experience as it causes discussion and may bring up a question that someone may have had or teach him about something he had never experienced or seen. Another part of quality control is checking to make sure the ultrasound study on a patient is correlating with the results of a different test (CT, Angiogram, etc) or a previous study. When an ultrasound exam is tested against another modality for accuracy, it is often tested against the gold standard for that type of exam or diagnosis. Quality Assurance is also checked through the maintenance of the ultrasound machine.

A gold standard is something set up as an example against which others of the same type are compared.

So if diagnostic ultrasound isn’t considered a gold standard, what is? That all depends on which type of diagnosis one is looking for. In the diagnosis of abdominal aortic aneurysm, as stated by the Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography, computed tomography is considered the gold standard. In the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis, venogram is considered the gold standard. In the diagnosis of appendicitis, computed tomography is the gold standard. In the diagnosis of peripheral vascular disease, angiography is the gold standard. Every known disease has its own gold standard of medical testing for diagnosis. Currently diagnostic ultrasound, while commonly used, is not a gold standard for any particular one.

As stated by Jurgen A. H. R. Claassen, “The concept of a ‘golden standard’ implies a level of perfection that can never be attained by any biological test, and will provoke criticism like that ventilated by Duggan. In contrast, a gold standard in its true meaning, derived from the monetary gold standard, merely denotes the best tool available at that time to compare different measures.”

The gold standard is not the perfect test but merely the best available test. – E Versi

Versi later goes on to say “It is the absolute truth that is never reached; gold standards are constantly challenged and superseded when appropriate.” The question is…will there ever be a day where ultrasound will supersede a gold standard to become the most accurate modality? B. Benacerraf looks into the future of ultrasound and its new role with 3D imaging. While she sees 3D imaging as being able to rival MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) there is no mention of it surpassing MRI. The future of ultrasound, however, is very exciting indeed! A new method is in progress labeled “fly through” allowing the sonographer to see a blood vessel as though going through it as one would a slide or tunnel. This amazing feature will allow for greater accuracy in the diagnosis of peripheral vascular disease. With these up and coming features ultrasound will remain a high contender for medical testing modalities and will always be the most commonly sought after exam. While these advancements are exciting, it should be remembered that ultrasound is not the only testing modality that will improve technologically. It is for this reason and the previous mentioned limitations of ultrasound that lead me to believe that though a “platinum standard” for a majority of medical tests, ultrasound can never be a gold standard for diagnostic imaging.

 

Sources:

1. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary copyright © 2014 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. Gold Standard Definition. http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/gold%20standard

2. MRI vs CT scan. © copyrite 2007 Vidalink, LLC. Retrieved July 28, 2014 from http://www.ct-scan-info.com/mrivsctscan.html

3. Introduction to Ultrasound – 01- Fundamentals. (2013). YouTube. Retrieved July 23, 2014, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXvvQYONlmE

4. Roy A. Filly, MD. (May 1988). “Ultrasound: The Stethoscope of the Future, Alas.” Radiology. Volume 167, Issue 2. Retrieved July 16, 2014, from http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/abs/10.1148/radiology.167.2.3282260

5. James C. R. Rippey; Alistair G. Royse. (September 2009) “Ultrasound in Trauma.” Best Practice & Research Clinical Anaesthesiology. Volume 23, Issue 3. Article retrieved July 18, 2014, from Virginia Commonwealth Online Library.

6. Brenda K. Zierler. (March 2004). “Ultrasonography and Diagnosis of Venous Thromboembolism.” Circulation. Volume 109, Issue 12. Retrieved July 18, 2014 from http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/109/12_suppl_1/I-9.full

7. Janet Cochrane Miller. (July 2005). “Imaging and Obese Patients.” Radiology Rounds. Volume 3, Issue 7. Retrieved July 28, 2014 from http://www.mghradrounds.org/clientuploads/july_2005/july_2005.pdf

8. “Focus On: Ultrasound for Appendicitis”. (June 2012). American College of Emergency Physicians. Retrieved July 28, 2014 from http://www.acep.org/Continuing-Education-top-banner/Focus-On–Ultrasound-for-Appendicitis/

9.  “Definition of Abdominal Guarding”. (March 2012) MedicineNet.com. Retrieved July 28, 2014 from http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7200

10. Lisa Parmley. “Types of Ultrasound: Uses and Limitations of Abdominal Ultrasound”. UltrasoundTechnicianCenter.org. Retrieved July 18, 2014 from http://www.ultrasoundtechniciancenter.org/ultrasound-knowledge/abdominal-ultrasound.html

11. Michael R. Jaff. (2002). “Lower Extremity Arterial Disease Diagnostic Aspects”. Cardiology Clinics. Retrieved July 28, 2014 from http://biomedix.com/UserFiles/File/Jaff,%20Michael_PVD%20Diagnosis.pdf

12. Linda L. Demer; Yin Tintut. (June 2008). “Vascular Calcification”. Circulation. Volume 117, Issue 22. Retrieved July 30, 2014 from http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/117/22/2938.full.pdf+html

13. Marveen Craig. (November 1985). “Quality Versus Quantity A Sonographer’s Ethical Dilemma”. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography. Volume 1, Number 6. Retrieved July 24, 2014 from http://jdm.sagepub.com/content/1/6/278.full.pdf+html

14. Cindy Weiland; Sandra L. Katanick. (2009). “Quality Assurance and Test Validation”. Duplex Scanning in Vascular Disorders. Fourth Edition, Chapter 4. Retrieved July 12, 2014 from http://www.intersocietal.org/vascular/forms/Quality_Assurance_Chapter_4.pdf

15. Quality Assurance of Medical Ultrasound System – Segment #1. (2010). Youtube. Retrieved July 23, 2014 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADsyoJX2K80

16. S. Michelle Bierig; Ann Jones. (May 2009). “Accuracy and Cost Comparison of Ultrasound Versus Alternative Imaging Modalities, Including CT, MR, PET, and Angiography”. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography. Volume 25, Number 3. Retrieved July 12, 2014 from http://jdm.sagepub.com/content/25/3/138.full.pdf+html

17. David A. Sandler; John S. Duncan; Peter Ward , Anthony C. Lamont; Susan Sherriff; John F. Martin; Glen M. Blake; Lawrence E. Ramsay; Brian Ross; Lee Walton. (September 1984). “Diagnosis of Deep-Vein Thrombosis: Comparison of Clinical Evaluation, Ultrasound, Plethysmography, and Venoscan with X-Ray Venogram”. The Lancet. Volume 324, Issue 8405. Retrieved July 24, 2014. 

18. SCOAP Metrics; Appendicitis: Ultrasound or CT Scan. (2010). Youtube. Retrieved July 28, 2014 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnUGjR960h8

19. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. (June 2007) “Assessing Peripheral Arterial Disease”. University of York. Retrieved July 30, 2014 from http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/pad-summary.pdf

20. Jurgen A. H. R. Claassen. (May 2005). “The Gold Standard: Not A Golden Standard”. British Medical Journal. Volume 330. Retrieved July 23, 2014 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC557893/

21. E. Versi. (July 1992). “Gold standard” is an appropriate term”. British Medical Journal. Volume 305. Retrieved July 23, 2014 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1883235/?page=1

22. B. Benacerraf. (February 2004). “The Future of ultrasound: viewing the dark side of the moon?” Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Volume 23, Issue 3. Retrieved July 16, 2014 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/enhanced/doi/10.1002/uog.993

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Ultrasound – The Gold Standard?”

  1. I think that you did a great job on your rough draft. Overall you were very concise and made good arguments. All of your sources seemed ti be good. If you could add a few more peer-reviewed sources that would probably be beneficial and give you even more support for your argument. You did a good job of hyper linking your sources, making it easy to navigate through your paper. On your final don’t forget to add a bibliography. You’re argument was clear and persuasive. I think you kept your readers’ focus and kept it interesting. You’re argument was very logical. The embedded images definitely made it more interesting as well as the videos you included. I was moved by your argument, because it really made you think about the future advancements that can come. I think that anyone reading your argument would understand and be moved as well.

  2. This is a really good rough draft. This draft is very informative and is progressing very well. I also like how this site allows you to link out to the sources you have used and that you chose a site you already had experienced with. I choose a different site and I am still learning how to use all of its tools. That is something I need to work on as well as the rest of my draft. Your draft seems almost complete, you wont have much to change for the final. I love the use of photos and videos you included. The short lengths keeps the readers on your piece and the visuals help them to picture what you write about. I can see that you have links but remember to include a citation section. I really like how you approached this assignment and I learn from your draft.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s