|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: no subject received Tue, 3 Mar 2009 01:09:11 -0600 (u/s report)From: Den0481@aol.comTue Mar 3 10:22:24 2009
Thanks for explaining what a SIS is How does that differ from a Saline Ultra Sound? Thanks for offering to review the films of her 2nd U/S However, I checked with the facility that performed it & the doctor reads them direct, so ...... no films are kept! In a message dated 3/3/2009 12:03:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, lyons@cc.umanitoba.ca writes: Saline infused sonohysterogram Ted Dr E.A. Lyons O.C. FRCP(C), FACR Prof of Radiology, Obstet & Gyn and Anatomy From: ultrasound@obgyn.net [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Den0481@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:54 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND Subject: Re: no subject received Tue, 3 Mar 2009 01:09:11 -0600 (u/s report) What is a SIS ? In a message dated 3/3/2009 10:35:01 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, lyons@cc.umanitoba.ca writes: I have seen several cases of this. There is an echogenic area in the subendometrial area. You will see nothing on SIS or hysteroscopy. It is likely fat or hydropic change but unlikely malignant or significant in OUR cases. I would need to see your images to be certain. Ted Dr E.A. Lyons O.C. FRCP(C), FACR Prof of Radiology, Obstet & Gyn and Anatomy -----Original Message----- From: ultrasound@obgyn.net [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of gypsy Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:52 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND Subject: Re: no subject received Tue, 3 Mar 2009 01:09:11 -0600 (u/s report) At Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Anthony E. Swartz wrote: --0016e64755a43323d6046436ed00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Probably a submucosal fibroid or less likely an endometrial polyp. aes Thank you, she was told to have a hysterectomy (age 62) because her doctor said, "we don't know what it is". Original U/S showed .... Uterus: anteverted, enlarged with myomas as noted below. Sie: logitudinal 76 mm, anterio-posterior 61mm, transverse 77 mm Estimated uterine weight 185 grams cervical length 28 mm Myometrium: Fibroids: 1. size 24 mm, intramural, right lateral wall 2. size 63 mm, subserous posterior Endometrium; appears ill-defined, echogenic, & thickened. Thickness 20.1 mm Left ovary: size 27 mm x 14 mm Right ovary: size 31 mm x 11 mm Method: transvaginal ultrasound, color Doppler, 2D, 3D Report Summary: Overall impression: endometrium is distorted, echogenic, thickened: an intracavity echogenic mass is likely On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:10 AM, gypsy <Den0481@aol.com> wrote: As a home health nurse, I had a patient yesterday show me her ultrasound report & ask me to explain it to her, as she didn't understand what her doctor had told her. I had no idea what that report meant. She has had had fibroids for years & has them checked yearly by U/S. This year they were concerned about the endrometrium being thickened. Biopsy was performed & was negative. A saline ultrasound was performed which showed no thickened endrometrium, no intracavitary mass. But, did show "the echogenic area of irregular shape, thought to be intracavitary on prior scan is actually located in the left anterior wall. This area shows irregular texture, is well demarcated from surrounding uterine tissue, but is of irregular shape and contour." large posterior myome again noted small, right, anterior myome noted
Can you help me explain these results to her?
her physician is currently out of town)
>>
</div>
><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:10 AM, gypsy <span
><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px
>doctor had told her. I had no idea what that report meant. She has had had fibroids for years & has them checked yearly by U/S. This year they were concerned about the endrometrium being thickened.
>Biopsy was performed & was negative. A saline ultrasound was
>actually located in the left anterior wall. This area shows Can you help me explain these results to her?
> (her physician is currently out of town) -- Anthony E. Swartz, B.S., RT(R), RDMS Practice Supervisor, Maternal-Fetal Medicine WakeMed Health & Hospitals Raleigh, North Carolina
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:37:48 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.