Can A Radiologist Conclude That A Soft Tissue Swelling Is Infective In Nature Through An Mri Test?
Infective in nature means infection. Shouldn’t infection be tested by using blood test or other tests? From what I know, a swelling shown on an MRI film just means the cells or tissues are inflammed. We shouldn’t be able to tell what causes it, can we? Can a radiologist tell that the swelling is caused by infection by studying the MRI films?
Word Search
Pages
Questions About
- Anatomy and Physiology
- Cat Scan
- General Radiology Questions
- MRI
- Nuclear Medicine
- Pregnancy Concerns
- Radiographic Positioning
- Radiologic Physics
- Radiology Clinicals
- Radiology Residency
- Study Tips
Staff Links
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
You’re exactly right, the MRI will demonstrate an area of inflammation as being relatively bright in T2 weighted sequences, but the MR will not be able to determine what the nature of the inflamation is, i.e. malignant, traumatic or infectious. The appearance of it, however, will allow the radiologist to generate a differential diagnosis and some lesions may have a higher likelihood of being infectious as opposed to some other pathology.
the person above me summed it up nicely. it will have something to do with densities and surrounding tissues. also, in the “impression” section of the radiologist report, it will not definitively say “infection”. it wil say yada yada yada *suggests* such and such is *infective in nature.
that is where the responsibility of the radiologist ends.
the treating physician would no way treat for infection without correlating clinical findings- elevated wbcs etc.
MRI gives the best detailed picture of any imaging available. Cancerous lesions or other soft tissue problems that make the desity in that tissue much different from srrounding tissue are easy to identify. Just an old cellulitis or infection though will need clinical correlation and for sure an elevated white blood cel count if there’s an infection.
Leave A Reply