|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Terry, your first case of this yearFrom: DuBose, Terry (DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu)Thu May 27 13:21:49 1999
Dr. Smeltzer, et al. Sorry for the delay in responding (see below). The placenta that Dr. Worrall was referring to was the very first case study that we put up. It was a case that we thought was a miscarriage in progress (spontaneous AB) at 7 LMP weeks because it had such a bizarre appearance. There was an embryonic heart beat that corresponded to the CRL, but there was a major collection of fluid in the space around the decidua capsularis. However, at 30 weeks it turned out to be a complete previa with major hemorrhage. I got into a flame war because in our first attempt at a Case Study we wanted to use the ability of Links and have the reader step through the case, and answer questions before going on to the next portion. Unfortunately, we had a contract editor that did not understand sonography or medicine, and another person was doing the HTML, so we ended up with a less than satisfactory product. Many people did not read the entire case, particularly the final outcome, and thought I was implying that we had diagnosed the previa at 7 weeks, which we did not. We predicted a miscarriage (I also got into trouble for using that term instead of abortion). All in all, in our naive foray into Email the other person and I ended up calling each other names.... unforgivable. I learned a lot in that little episode about quick, brief responses and instantaneous SEND buttons. ;-) This is the earliest image of a placenta previa that I have ever seen, and may be the earliest publication of such a sonograph... however I reiterate, while this does represent a 7 week placenta previa, we did NOT realize that was what it was at the time. It was only diagnosed at 30 weeks. For any who would like to go back and see what this looked like, please see: Case Study #1 (January, 1998): Early placenta previa vs. threatened abortion, </us/cotm/9801/cotm001.htm> by T.J. DuBose, MS, RDMS at http://www.obgyn.net/us/cotm/9801/cotm001.htm <http://www.obgyn.net/us/cotm/9801/cotm001.htm> And to read (and laugh at) a number of embarrassing messages about this case see: http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0087.html <http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0087.html> http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0104.html <http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0104.html> http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0108.html <http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0108.html> http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0129.html <http://forums.obgyn.net/forums/ultrasound/ULTRASOUND.9801/0129.html> These are just four of the representative messages, there were many more, follow the thread if you can. Unfortunately the messages were flying fast and furiously, many passed in the ether which led to misunderstandings. It blew up in less than 48 hours. I ended up apologizing to Dr. Luis Sanchez-Ramos, but alas, I fear he has left the Ultrasound Section for good. A mutual friend assured me that Dr. Luis Sanchez-Ramos is a good guy, but I do not believe either of us understood the nature of electronic communications and flame wars. I still regret it, but I must say I learned a lot. Comments welcome. Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FAIUM University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock, Arkansas, USA ---- -----Original Message----- From: James S Smeltzer MD [SMTP:gaperina@mindspring.com] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 11:14 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND Subject: Re: Terry, your first case of this year Terry? BTW, how did that placenta turn out? Jim
At 03:02 PM 5/18/1999 -0500, you wrote:
>Terry, take a look at OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY (green journal)
|
|
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 05:40:00 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.