2016
DOI: 10.1177/1938640016656784
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intraoperative Ultrasound Guidance for the Removal of Nonmetallic Foreign Body from the Foot

Abstract: Therapeutic, Level IV: Case report.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2 The possibility of false negative results with an ultrasonographic examination has been reported for FB located close to the bone. 3 In our study, in four dogs, an FB was visualized with preop-CT/MRI and/or preop-US but was not found during surgical exploration. These FB could have been flushed during surgical drainage of the abscess.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…2 The possibility of false negative results with an ultrasonographic examination has been reported for FB located close to the bone. 3 In our study, in four dogs, an FB was visualized with preop-CT/MRI and/or preop-US but was not found during surgical exploration. These FB could have been flushed during surgical drainage of the abscess.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 51%
“…1 Relapses due to failure to remove the migrating FB are commonly reported in man and in and animals. [2][3][4][5]10,12 In our study, 39% of the dogs were presented to a clinician after one or more surgical treatment had already been attempted, with failure in each case to remove the FB during surgery. This observation highlights the complexity the clinician is faced with in treatment of migrating FB.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Ultrasonic has been successfully been applied for freezing, cavitation, emulsification and thermosonication for many types of food products [5][6][7]. Several investigationson foreign body detection using ultrasonic sensor had been carried out as reported by Correia et al [8], Zhao et al [9], Pallav et al [10],Leemans and Destain [11], Tantray et al [12] and Polat et al [13], Mcclements [14],Hassler and Homayoon [15], Le Coz et al [16],Iuliano [17], Liu et al [18], Liaw et al [19], Makinde et al [20], Holmes et al [21], Melo et al [22], Khan et al [23], Prabhakar et al [24],Rodrigues et al [25], Franchini et al [26], Pandey [27], Aftab et al [28], Gounder and Tan [29], Sadaka et al [30], Fasina et al [31], Khan et al [32], Mitev et al [33], Roux et al [34], Nakib et al [35], Rathore [36], Singleton et al [37], Mahesh et al [38], Ezenwa [39], Natung [40] and Mustapha [41], In this paper, two common foreign bodies materials e.g. steel and rubber with different sizes were used to investigate the sensor voltage and voltage loss at the ultrasonic receiver.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%