Re: Doppler for office u/s. Was: ?hetertopic pregnancy
From: Rafael Haciski MD (haciski@earthlink.net)
Tue Feb 27 19:23:25 2001
No it's not a toy - it was originally developed for use in the battlefield
by the army. I have tried it and it's a very nice machine, although I
thought I was quoted 16 or 18K, not 20.
The resolution is slightly less than my Ultramark 4
--
Rafael Haciski, MD FACOG
Gynecology & Infertility Assoc.
Baltimore MD
http://www.ivf-md.com
> From: Larry Glazerman <l.glazerman@rcn.com>
> Reply-To: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net
> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 18:21:04 -0600
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@mail.medispecialty.com>
> Subject: Re: Doppler for office u/s. Was: ?hetertopic pregnancy
>
> I looked at Sonosite. It really seemed like a bit of a toy, given the price
> (close to $20K) and image quality. I bought a GE Logiq 200 for about $27K
> and I'm really happy with it.
>
> At 04:12 PM 2/27/01 -0600, you wrote:
>> Rich -
>>
>> doppler at present not worth the $ for office machine - for the reasons
>> you stated. have you considered sonosite vs mysono? will be looking at
>> them at aium ( assuming they are there) and would be happy to share my
>> thoughts.
>>
>> art
>>
>> At Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Richard Chudacoff, MD wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm looking to purchase a new ultrasound for my office. The ole Ultramark IV
>>> is on its last legs. I've considered getting Doppler but just don't see that
>>> reimbursements are going to offset the extra cost of the machine. The way I
>>> look at it, it is kind of expensive just to hear fetal heart motion in the
>>> first trimester.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on whether Doppler is a must for a small solo-practice with a
>>> diagnostic center right next-door?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Richard Chudacoff, MD
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net]On Behalf Of art
>>> fougner, md
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 7:57 AM
>>> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
>>> Subject: Re: ?hetertopic pregnancy
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> "ring of fire" often either absent or incomplete in some ectopics
>>> fizzling out. of course these could be managed expectantly, which is
>>> what might be the prudent course of action here. Mark, had a case
>>> recently featuring a healthy growing IUG sac, risiing Betas, pain and an
>>> adnexal mass separate from the ovary and consistent with thickened tube.
>>> increasing pain prompted laparoscopy, revealing torsion of the fallopian
>>> tube.
>>>
>>> art
>>>
>>> At Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Paul Prior MD wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:22:58 -0600, Mark Perloe <mperloe@ivf.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> KA is a 32 yo G3 ectopic 2 female s/p right salpingectomy. She conceived
>>>>> after ovulation induction and IUI (3 mature follicles with E2 384pg/ml
>>>>> peak). An intrauterine gestational sac with fetal pole and FHT is seen.
>>> She
>>>>> complains of left adnexal pain. The left ovary is enlarged suggesting mild
>>>>> hyperstimulation. A small 1cm saclike structure on the edge of the
>>>>> ovary. Over the past week it has not changed in size. It appears to be
>>>>> attached (moves with) the ovary. She is now 6W4D.
>>>>
>>>> Doppler on the ovary? I'm sure you are more experience in this than
>>>> I, Mark, but did you turn on the doppler in this area? I have found
>>>> the "ring of fire" to be very helpful for ectopics.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Paul Prior MD
>>>> Coshocton, OH
>>>> Solo Practice
>>>> OB/GYN, FACOG
>>>>
>>> --
>>> art fougner, md
>>>
>>> A series of 1000 cases begins with but a single anecdote.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> art fougner, md
>>
>> A series of 1000 cases begins with but a single anecdote.
>
> Larry R. Glazerman, MD
> Ob-Gyn at Trexlertown
> 610-402-0161
> l.glazerman@rcn.com
>
