Ultrasound imaging of the skin is becoming more and more popular. Skin ultrasound examinations are used both in order to assess healthy skin and to evaluate pathological lesions. They are mainly performed in dermatology as well as in broadly understood aesthetic medicine and cosmetology. At present, skin imaging is enabled by high-frequency equipment and high-quality conventional devices. The introduction of high-frequency electronic transducers which are supported by conventional scanners may be a turning point in skin ultrasound equipment. Irrespective of the ultrasound scanner, three layers may be distinguished in the image of the healthy skin: epidermal echo, dermis and subcutaneous tissue. High-frequency equipment allows for detailed imaging of the epidermal echo, dermis and upper part of the subcutaneous tissue. It is also possible to visualize the skin appendages (hair with follicles and nails) as well as slight vessels that run in the dermis and upper subcutaneous tissue. Contrary to high-frequency equipment, conventional scanners do not allow for a detailed assessment of the epidermal and dermal echoes. Instead, they enable the visualization of the entire subcutaneous tissue. The following parameters are used for the assessment of skin ultrasound images: thickness of individual skin layers, caliber of blood vessels, echogenicity of the dermis or its individual layers, echogenicity of the subcutaneous tissue as well as the presence or absence of flow in slight venous vessels. Currently, the studies on the usage of sonoelastography for skin assessment are in progress. Considering the dynamic development of skin imaging equipment and its diagnostic possibilities, one might suspect that high-frequency examinations will become more common and will be fundamental for the evaluation of both healthy and pathologically altered skin. This paper is an introduction to a series of articles on the clinical application of high-frequency ultrasound. The next articles will be published in the subsequent issues.

Classic and high-frequency ultrasonographies are useful methods for monitoring anti-cellulite therapies.

Radiofrequency enables cellulite reduction. A crucial aspect is proper monitoring of the progress of such therapy, which ultrasound allows.

Although elastography can enhance the differential diagnosis of thyroid nodules, its diagnostic performance is not ideal at present. Further improvements in the technique and creation of robust diagnostic criteria are necessary. The purpose of this study was to compare the usefulness of strain elastography and a new generation of elasticity imaging called supersonic shear wave elastography (SSWE) in differential evaluation of thyroid nodules. Six thyroid nodules in 4 patients were studied. SSWE yielded 1 true-positive and 5 true-negative results. Strain elastography yielded 5 false-positive results and 1 false-negative result. A novel finding appreciated with SSWE, were punctate foci of increased stiffness corresponding to microcalcifications in 4 nodules, some not visible on B-mode ultrasound, as opposed to soft, colloid-inspissated areas visible on B-mode ultrasound in 2 nodules. This preliminary paper indicates that SSWE may outperform strain elastography in differentiation of thyroid nodules with regard to their stiffness. SSWE showed the possibility of differentiation of high echogenic foci into microcalcifications and inspissated colloid, adding a new dimension to thyroid elastography. Further multicenter large-scale studies of thyroid nodules evaluating different elastographic methods are warranted.

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) and other risk stratification systems may improve ultrasound image interpretation. This prospective study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of CAD and the European Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (EU-TIRADS) classification applied by physicians with S-Detect 2 software CAD based on Korean Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System (K-TIRADS) and combinations of both methods (MODELs 1 to 5). In all, 133 nodules from 88 patients referred to thyroidectomy with available histopathology or with unambiguous results of cytology were included. The S-Detect system, EU-TIRADS, and mixed MODELs 1–5 for the diagnosis of thyroid cancer showed a sensitivity of 89.4%, 90.9%, 84.9%, 95.5%, 93.9%, 78.9% and 93.9%; a specificity of 80.6%, 61.2%, 88.1%, 53.7%, 73.1%, 89.6% and 80.6%; a positive predictive value of 81.9%, 69.8%, 87.5%, 67%, 77.5%, 88.1% and 82.7%; a negative predictive value of 88.5%, 87.2%, 85.5%, 92.3%, 92.5%, 81.1% and 93.1%; and an accuracy of 85%, 75.9%, 86.5%, 74.4%, 83.5%, 84.2%, and 87.2%, respectively. Comparison showed superiority of the similar MODELs 1 and 5 over other mixed models as well as EU-TIRADS and S-Detect used alone (p-value < 0.05). S-Detect software is characterized with high sensitivity and good specificity, whereas EU-TIRADS has high sensitivity, but rather low specificity. The best diagnostic performance in malignant thyroid nodule (TN) risk stratification was obtained for the combined model of S-Detect (“possibly malignant” nodule) and simultaneously obtaining 4 or 5 points (MODEL 1) or exactly 5 points (MODEL 5) on the EU-TIRADS scale.