• O Ackermann, P Liedgens, K Eckert, E Chelangattucherry, B Husain, and S Ruchholtz.
• Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Klinikum Duisburg, Zu den Rehwiesen 9, 47055, Duisburg, Deutschland. ole.ackermann@klinikum-duisburg.de
• Unfallchirurg. 2009 Aug 1; 112 (8): 706-11.

BackgroundMetaphyseal forearm fractures are a common pathology in any emergency department. The standard diagnostic procedure involves X-rays of the forearm and wrist. As former studies have shown that these fractures can be visualized using ultrasound, we compared the accuracy of sonographic and X-ray diagnostics.MethodsFrom January 2007 to May 2008, a total of 93 patients aged between 0 and 12 years with forearm trauma were initially examined using a 7.5-Mhz linear transducer. After diagnosis, axis deviation and treatment were fixed and standard X-rays were taken. The results of the two diagnostic procedures were compared. The examiners were doctors in training or consultants and underwent no specific training.ResultsWe found 77 fractures in 64 patients (50 radius, 1 ulna, 13 radius and ulna). The sensitivity of ultrasound diagnostics was 94% and the specificity 99% compared with X-ray diagnosis. Mean axis deviation differences were 1.8 degrees (radius) and 0.7 degrees (ulna).ConclusionUltrasound seems to be a valuable and safe alternative to X-ray diagnosis. Patients with inconclusive findings should undergo X-ray diagnosis.

19 keywords...

hide…