Ultrasound for the Detection of Retained Plastic and Undetected Metallic Foreign Bodies in the Foot

Abstract

Foreign bodies in soft tissue may cause serious problems for both emergency physicians and orthopaedic surgeons. Wooden or plastic foreign bodies which are diolucent can not be diagnosed with direct graphy and they are more prone to cause soft tissue complication unless they detect. We present two cases with retained plastic and metallic foreign bodies including in their right feet of a farmer and a constructor which could not diagnosed with plain film and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Definitive treatment was done after detecting the foreign bodies with ultrasonography (US).

Keywords

• -

Ultrasound for the Detection of Retained Plastic and Undetected Metallic Foreign Bodies in the Foot

Öz

-

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

Kaynakça

1. Anderson MA, Newmeyer WL 3rd, Kilgore ES.Diagnosis and treatment of retained foreign bodies in the hand. Am J Surg 1982; 144:63-7.
2. Banerjee B, Das RK: Sonographic detection of foreign bod- ies in the extremities. Br J Radiol 1991; 64:107-12.
3. Blyme PJH, Lind T, Schantz K, et al: Ultrasonographic detection of foreign bodies in soft tissue. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1990; 110:24-5.
4. Bray PW, Mahoney JL, Campbell JP. Sensitivityand speci- ficity of ultrasound in diagnosis of foreign bodies in the hand. J Hand Surg 1995; 20:661-6.
5. Conti RJ, Shinder M. Soft tissue calcifications induced by local corticosteroid injection. J Foot Surg 30:34-7, 1991.
6. Crawford R, Matheson AB. Clinical value of ultrasonogra- phy in thedetection and removal of radiolucent foreign bodies. Injury 1989; 20:338-44.
7. Fornage BD, Schernberg FL: Sonographic diagnosis of foreign bodies in distal extremeties. Am J Radiol 1986; 147:567-9.
8. Gooding GA, Hardiman T, Sumers M, et al: Sonography of the hand and foot in foreign body detection. J Ultrasound Med 1987; 6:441-7.

9. Jacobson JA, Powell A, Craig JG, Bouffard JA, vanHols- beeck MT. Wooden foreign bodies in soft tissue: detection at US. Radiology 1998; 206:45-8.
10. Little CM, Parker MG, Callowich MC, Sartori JC. The ul- trasonic detection of soft tissue foreign bodies. Invest Radiol 1986; 21:268-82.
11. Manthey DE, Storrow AB, Milbourn JM, Wagner BJ: Ultrasound versus radiography in the detection of soft- tissue foreign bodies. Ann Emerg Med, 1996; 28:7-9.
12. Mattre SR, Stephen CG, Charles JG, Michael EB, Kenneth HZ, The use fultrasonography for the detection of re- tained wooden foreign bodies in the foot, J Foot Ankle Surg 1995; 34:478-84.
13. Mizel MS, Steinmetz ND, Trepman E. Detectionof wooden foreign bodies in muscle tissue: experimental comparison of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography. Foot Ankle Int 1994; 15:437-43.
14. Morgan WJ, Leopold T, Evans R: Foreign bodies in the hand. J Hand Surg 9:194-196, 1988. 15 Ober CP, Jones JC, Larson MM, Lanz OI, Werre SR. Comparison of ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in detection of acute wooden foreign bodies in the canine manus. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2008; 49:411-8.
15. Peter WB, James LM, Joan PC, Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound in the diagnosis of foreign bodies in the hand, J Hand Surg 1995; 20A:661-6.
16. Read JW, Conolly WB, Lanzetta M, Spielman S, Snodgrass D, Korber JS,Diagnostic ultrasound of the hand and wrist. J Hand Surg 1996; 21A:1004-10.
17. Richard LL, Thomas M, Detection and management of for- eign bodies insoft tissue, Emerg Med Clin North Am 1992; 10:767-81.
18. Robert H, Richard C, Paul G, Michael H, Ultrasound for the detection of foreign bodies in human tissue, Ann Emerg Med 1997; 29: 353-6.
19. Schlager D, Sanders A, Wiggins D, et al: Ultrasound for the detection of foreign bodies. Ann Emerg Med 1991; 20:189-91.