Skip to main content
Log in

Common pitfalls and mistakes in pediatric ultrasound

  • Review Article–Pediatrics
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Ultrasonics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are many errors and pitfalls that are commonly encountered during ultrasound examinations. In normal ultrasound, pitfalls may arise from anatomic or physiologic variants of pediatric anatomy, settings, artifacts, patient conditions, operator misunderstanding, or inexperienced performance. In limited field and point-of-care ultrasound, common errors are usually due to limited access, misdiagnosis as a result of wrong timing, unsuitable patient conditions, limited transducer options, satisfaction of search, and unfamiliarity with pediatric sonography. Knowledge of these pitfalls helps improve a physician’s performance and diagnosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mary PB, Sally W, Jonathan RDS, et al. Embryology, anatomy, and variants of the genitourinary tract. In: Coley BD, editor. Caffey’s pediatric diagnostic imaging. 12th ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013. p. 1163–324.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bhatt S, MacLennan G, Dogra V, et al. Renal pseudotumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:1380–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Daneman A, Navarro OM, Somers GR, et al. Renal pyramids: focused sonography of normal and pathologic processes. Radiographics. 2010;30:1287–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Riccabona M. Ultrasound of the urogenital tract. In: Riccabona M, editor. Pediatric ultrasound: requisites and applications. 1st ed. New York City: Springer Science and Business Media; 2014. p. 321–64.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Lowe LH, Bailey Z. State-of-the-art cranial sonography: part 2, pitfalls and variants. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:1034–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zahl SM, Egge A, Helseth E, et al. Benign external hydrocephalus: a review, with emphasis on management. Neurosurg Rev. 2011;34:417–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shaw CM, Alvord EC Jr. Cava septi pellucidi et vergae: their normal and pathogical states. Brain. 1969;92:213–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Costa NS, Laor T, Donnelly LF. Superior cervical extension of the thymus: a normal finding that should not be mistaken for a mass. Radiology. 2010;56:238–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rubens DJ, Bhatt S, Nedelka S, et al. Doppler artifacts and pitfalls. Radiol Clin North Am. 2006;44:805–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. William DM, Siegel MJ. Ultrasound artifacts. In: Siegel MJ, editor. Pediatric sonography. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2011. p. 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Christopher RBM. Physics of ultrasound. In: Rumack CM, editor. Diagnostic ultrasound. 3rd ed. Missouri: Mosby Inc.; 2011. p. 9–10.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hall TJ. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in ultrasound. Radiographics. 2003;23:1657–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Iwabuchi T, Sobata E, Suzuki S, et al. The significance of dural sinus pressure in neurological surgery: correlation with surgical position. No Shinkei Geka. 1983;11:1167–76.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lowe LH, Johanek AJ, Moore CW. Sonography of the neonatal spine: part 1, normal anatomy, imaging pitfalls, and variations that may simulate disorders. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:733–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Koc Z, Oguzkurt L, Ulusan S. Portal venous system aneurysms: imaging, clinical findings, and a possible new etiologic factor. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:1023–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nattinee Leelakanok.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Nattinee Leelakanok and Panruethai Trinavarat declare that they have no conflicts of interest. Michael Riccabona received honoraria and travel compensation from US companies (Siemens, GE) and a contrast agent company (Bracco) within 36 months, and is also involved in equipment improvement and protocol development for many ultrasound vendors and contrast agent companies. However, these have no impact on this article.

Ethical statements

All ultrasound exams were performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions. Informed consent was obtained from all patients who underwent ultrasound. Images were retrospectively used with institutional approval. No identifying information of patients is included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leelakanok, N., Trinavarat, P. & Riccabona, M. Common pitfalls and mistakes in pediatric ultrasound. J Med Ultrasonics 46, 399–412 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-019-00954-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-019-00954-2

Keywords

Navigation