Skip to main content

Archived Comments for: The appropriate use of radiography in clinical practice: a report of two cases of biomechanical versus malignant spine pain

Back to article

  1. plain film radiography

    Mark Lopes, Gonstead Clinical Studies Society

    8 March 2010

    In the case studies, there is mention of plain film radiography being considered normal. The description of what views were taken is incomplete. There is a photo of an A-P lumbar view in one case reportedly showing no significant findings. The MRI reportedly picked up the malignancy. The MRI shown was a lateral view. Was there a lateral plain film taken? The point of the article seems to be that not taking a plain film initially didn't alter the outcome. The patients apparently died, but if a lateral was not taken as would be standard practice if one is to expose an area (taking opposing views of the area is generally accepted as standard) how are we to know the lateral plain film would not have shown the malignancy? The second case was similar, only showing an A-P chest view. Was a lateral taken? I think it was incomplete not to at least discuss whether or not laterals were taken in order to make the point that taking the plain film did not alter the course of care in either case.

    Competing interests

    No competing interests exist.