A patient came to us with postmenopausal uterine bleeding. She had no abnormality on pelvic examination. I asked for an ultrasonic scan of her pelvis. A week later she presented with a report. Her uterine description was as follows.
The uterus measures 5.9 X 3.6 cm. Endometrial thickness is 9.7 cm in the fundal region.
The ultrasonography resident doctor must have made a mistake while writing the unit of the endometrial thickness, I thought. It must have been millimeters. I could have corrected it myself, but thought I should talk to him, so that he would be careful in future. After all, when he went into private practice, such errors could prove damaging. I called him.
"This patient's uterus measures 5.9 X 3.6 cm in your report, while the endometrial thickness is 9.7 cm. That cannot be. Endometrium cannot be bigger than the uterus itself."
"I will have to look at it" he said. So I sent the patient to meet him. She came back after half an hour. She had a brand new scan performed by the Assistant Professor of ultrasonography, and the report written by the same resident doctor. This time the uterine measurements were 6.1 X 3.7 cm and the endometrial thickness was 9.6 cm in the fundal region. This seemed to be getting out of hand. I called the Assistant Professor and explained the situation to her.
"I have done the scan myself" she said. "The new dimensions are correct."
"Thanks" I said. "But the endometrial thickness is stated to be 9.6 cm, which is far bigger than the uterus itself. I wanted that part corrected."
"No, no!" she said. "It is not centimeters, it is meters."
I was aghast. She must have heard my catching my breath on the phone. She immediately corrected herself "I mean millimeters."
"Thanks" I said. I did not send the patient back for correction of the report, because the poor woman would be subjected not only to the trouble of another visit to the ultrasonography department, but perhaps their associate professor would perform a third scan on this patient, and the concerned resident doctor would write the endometrial thickness in centimeters again. :-)
The uterus measures 5.9 X 3.6 cm. Endometrial thickness is 9.7 cm in the fundal region.
The ultrasonography resident doctor must have made a mistake while writing the unit of the endometrial thickness, I thought. It must have been millimeters. I could have corrected it myself, but thought I should talk to him, so that he would be careful in future. After all, when he went into private practice, such errors could prove damaging. I called him.
"This patient's uterus measures 5.9 X 3.6 cm in your report, while the endometrial thickness is 9.7 cm. That cannot be. Endometrium cannot be bigger than the uterus itself."
"I will have to look at it" he said. So I sent the patient to meet him. She came back after half an hour. She had a brand new scan performed by the Assistant Professor of ultrasonography, and the report written by the same resident doctor. This time the uterine measurements were 6.1 X 3.7 cm and the endometrial thickness was 9.6 cm in the fundal region. This seemed to be getting out of hand. I called the Assistant Professor and explained the situation to her.
"I have done the scan myself" she said. "The new dimensions are correct."
"Thanks" I said. "But the endometrial thickness is stated to be 9.6 cm, which is far bigger than the uterus itself. I wanted that part corrected."
"No, no!" she said. "It is not centimeters, it is meters."
I was aghast. She must have heard my catching my breath on the phone. She immediately corrected herself "I mean millimeters."
"Thanks" I said. I did not send the patient back for correction of the report, because the poor woman would be subjected not only to the trouble of another visit to the ultrasonography department, but perhaps their associate professor would perform a third scan on this patient, and the concerned resident doctor would write the endometrial thickness in centimeters again. :-)
