Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on July 13, 2009
Rheumatology 2009 48(9):1019-1020; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kep196
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Editorial |
Why aren't we all doing ultrasound?
1Rheumatology Department, University Hospital Aintree, Liverpool, UK
Correspondence to: Cristina Estrach, University Hospital Aintree, Lower Lane, Liverpool, L9 7AL, UK. E-mail: cristina.estrach@aintree.nhs.uk
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
Musculoskeletal ultrasound (MUS) is potentially the most exciting development in clinical rheumatology practice in recent years. It is readily accessible, patient friendly and relatively inexpensive. It can be used to detect small joint effusions and thus increase the accuracy of diagnostic aspiration and therapeutic injection [1]. It is more sensitive than clinical examination in detecting enthesitis [2] and seven times more sensitive than X-ray in detecting small erosions [3]. It is in the area of detection of early synovitis, however, where the greatest potential lies. MUS can detect subclinical inflammation and is comparable with MRI in this respect [4, 5], a phenomenon that may explain the apparent dissociation between clinical remission and
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. Garrood and P. Platt Access to training in musculoskeletal ultrasound: a survey of UK rheumatology trainees Rheumatology, October 7, 2009; (2009) kep319v1. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
