Cathy W. DiBernardo, RN, RDMS, ROUB, and Ellen F. Greenberg, COT, RDMS, ROUB. Thieme, New York, 2007. ISBN: 978-3-13-108632-7, $99.95. Scope: This book represents an extensively updated version of the successful first edition published in 1998 and co-authored by Cathy DiBarnardo, Andrew Schachat, and Sharon Fekrat. This new volume highlights the major advances in ophthalmic ultrasound developed and improved over the past decade and more clearly expands the echographic characteristics of a wide variety of ocular and orbital lesions. The book is divided into 11 chapters. An introductory chapter presents a thorough review of basic screening techniques and labeling conventions. A single chapter devoted to the anterior segment has been extensively expanded with many new images, including excellent photos using the 20 and 50 MHz (UBM) probes. These include a wide variety of common and unusual disease processes. Three chapters, “Vitreous,” “Retina,” and “Choroid,” cover posterior segment disease. The previous chapter on orbital disease has been divided into three new chapters covering the retrobulbar optic nerve, extraocular muscles, and orbital lesions. There is a separate chapter on ocular trauma, and a very comprehensive chapter on intraocular tumors. A final chapter briefly discusses biometry and some unusual conditions such as glaucoma valves and scleral buckles. Each chapter has a small but useful list of selected references for those who wish to explore the subject further. Strengths: The major strength of this book is its authors, both of whom have many years of experience in an academic ultrasound facility. The atlas includes more than 550 high-quality figures to illustrate examination techniques and ultrasonic characteristics of more than 100 disease processes. It provides a quick pictorial reference guide for common disorders encountered in clinical practice, clearly demonstrating their characteristic echographic features. The book is easy to use and conditions are grouped conveniently by anatomic region of the eye and orbit. The figures are nicely labeled with arrows or letters indicating the sites of pathology. Weaknesses: The most important weakness of this book is the scant and largely absent correlation between clinical and histologic characteristics of disease processes and corresponding echographic findings. Such correlation would help the reader understand what is represented on the images. Also missing is any discussion of the physics of ultrasonography to give an understanding of how various components of the image are generated. In addition, there is also no discussion of various probe frequencies, when and why they are used, or how they give different types of information. Finally, it is widely acknowledged that the results of ophthalmic ultrasonography are extremely operator dependent. This book, like most similar volumes, does not discuss any details of artifacts, why they can be misinterpreted, and how they can be avoided by the operator. This information would be very useful for the novice ophthalmic user who is not a professional echographer. Recommended Audience: This book will be a welcome addition to the library of ophthalmic care providers-those in practice and those in training, physicians, and non-physicians. It will also be useful for non-ophthalmic echographers and radiologists who occasionally examine the eye. Critical Appraisal: Cathy DiBernardo and Ellen Greenberg, widely respected authorities on ophthalmic ultrasound, have brought their considerable expertise to this atlas. The book serves primarily as a reference comparative atlas to be used by those performing such echography. It will not serve the needs of individuals who are seeking a more comprehensive understanding of ultrasonography and its components as a diagnostic instrument. Jonathan J. Dutton, MD, PhD University of North Carolina School of Medicine Chapel Hill, North Carolina
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jonathan J. Dutton (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: