Clinical Utility and Pitfalls of Ultrasound Guided Foreign Body Removal in War Fighters
Abstract
Part 1 of the 3 part study was conducted on 13 May 2009 at Nationwide Children s Hospital. This was a cadaver cohort study with video comparison between radiologists with percutaneous USFBR, conventional surgical foreign body removal, and surgical foreign body removal with wire localization comparing incision size, time of procedure, wound closure (number of sutures), overall removal success and procedural differences. In this component, comparison data was collected using human cadaver thighs for testing differences between the surgical and percutaneous techniques. Part 1 was completed with success in year 1 using the tasks described in the approved SOW. The hypothesis for Part 1 was proven partially correct. The hypothesis was that ultrasound guided foreign body removal (USFBR) is faster and more effective than open surgical removal, with smaller incisions. The results found that USFBR is more effective than open surgical removal, with smaller incisions. However, the results also showed that the surgical method was faster. No progress was made in year 2 or year 3. A no cost extension (NCE) for future years 4, 5 and 6 were approved. No progress was made in year 4. Part 2 was approved and four of the Part 2 trainings occurred in year 5 & four additional training occurred in year 6. One research training class was conducted at each of the participating MTFs (TAMC, BAMC, MAMC, and WRNMMC) in each year 5 & 6. Part 3 has been approved for all sites and recruitment has begun. We are currently analyzing the data for Part 2 and collecting data for Part 3. A no cost extension Mod 5 was approved to extend the grant until 28 Sept 2015 in order to finish collecting and analyzing foreign body removal data.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Oct 01, 2014
- Accession Number
- ADA610670
Entities
People
- William E. Shiels Ii