We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of Radiographic, Ultrasound, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Retained Stingray Barb: A Cadaveric Study.
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine 2021 September
INTRODUCTION: Stingray envenomations are a common marine animal injury for which it is important to identify and remove retained barbs to prevent secondary infection. The optimal imaging modality in stingray foreign body detection is not well characterized in the existing literature. In this study, we compared the accuracy of plain radiography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting stingray barbs in the human foot and ankle.
METHODS: This cadaveric study included a 1:1 randomization to the presence or absence of barbs in 24 sample injuries of human cadaveric foot and ankle specimens. Physicians trained in emergency medicine and radiology performed ultrasound examinations on each specimen and interpreted the presence or absence of a barb. Participants also interpreted x-ray images in the same manner. MRI scans were separately interpreted by a musculoskeletal radiology attending. Data were analyzed using McNemar's test.
RESULTS: The 19 participants included 14 (74%) trained in emergency medicine and 5 (26%) trained in radiology. Forty-seven percent were residents, 42% faculty, and 11% fellows. X-ray was associated with the highest sensitivity of 94% for the identification of a retained barb, followed by MRI (83%) and ultrasound (70%). MRI was associated with the highest specificity of 100%, followed by x-ray (98%) and ultrasound (73%).
CONCLUSIONS: Retained stingray barbs can lead to secondary infection after envenomation. In human cadaveric specimens, x-ray demonstrated the highest sensitivity, MRI demonstrated the highest specificity, and ultrasound demonstrated lower sensitivity and specificity.
METHODS: This cadaveric study included a 1:1 randomization to the presence or absence of barbs in 24 sample injuries of human cadaveric foot and ankle specimens. Physicians trained in emergency medicine and radiology performed ultrasound examinations on each specimen and interpreted the presence or absence of a barb. Participants also interpreted x-ray images in the same manner. MRI scans were separately interpreted by a musculoskeletal radiology attending. Data were analyzed using McNemar's test.
RESULTS: The 19 participants included 14 (74%) trained in emergency medicine and 5 (26%) trained in radiology. Forty-seven percent were residents, 42% faculty, and 11% fellows. X-ray was associated with the highest sensitivity of 94% for the identification of a retained barb, followed by MRI (83%) and ultrasound (70%). MRI was associated with the highest specificity of 100%, followed by x-ray (98%) and ultrasound (73%).
CONCLUSIONS: Retained stingray barbs can lead to secondary infection after envenomation. In human cadaveric specimens, x-ray demonstrated the highest sensitivity, MRI demonstrated the highest specificity, and ultrasound demonstrated lower sensitivity and specificity.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app