Chest 120: Etched in stone

1 May
Chest 120 Stone

Chest 120; Etched in Stone

The Chest X-ray in this picture was from a man, an ex-smoker, who was losing weight, with a cough and localised wheeze in his chest. An area of density in the lung on the X-ray was obscured by blood vessels and it was determined as normal. Because the test was described as normal, clinical signs and symptoms were disregarded, no further tests were done, and the man presented months later with a large inoperable cancer. A court case followed.
A radiological diagnosis is not etched in stone. Over a long career I have been involved with many cases of physical child abuse, and for many of these been called as an expert witness in a trial of the accused abuser. It was during these trials where I discovered that medical evidence and legal evidence are two entirely different things.
Medical evidence is often fuzzy relying on statistical likelihood of a diagnosis based on imperfect criteria – sounds heard through a stethoscope, lumps palpated with the hand for example. The art of medicine is about management of uncertainty. Legal requirements on the other hand are for precisely defined points. Lawyers, and many doctors, treat a radiological image as hard, clearly defined evidence; the experience of my career tells me it is anything but!
Paradoxically, as imaging becomes more sophisticated and sensitive the importance of clinical judgement in deciding both when to order a test and to assess the clinical relevance of an abnormal finding on that test becomes more important. Real but incidental sub-clinical anatomical disorders such as normal developmental variants and degenerative changes that are not symptomatic are frequently detected. These types of changes are present in a large proportion of people with no symptoms. It is therefore important to know that a test should not be ordered unless it is likely to influence or change the treatment of a patient (although there are a few exceptions even to that rule).
Many types of errors creep into diagnosis, and it can sometimes be difficult to trust one’s own judgement. This phenomenon has been extensively studied, but the following example will serve to illustrate just one type of error in which the context determines interpretation. In the top line most people read A B C. However, exactly the same letter B when inserted into another context now reads as 13. In this type of framework the image itself can be treacherous.

ABC

Adapted from: Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar Straus & Giroux, 201

The Belgian surrealist painter, whom I greatly admire, René Magritte’s painting of a pipe “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” whose correct name is “The treachery of images” has fascinated me since I began studying radiology. It is about the relationship of an object and a representation of that object.

Pipe
The word is not the thing; the map is not the territory (Alfred Korzybski). And so, the X-ray is not the patient. It is a well-known, but poorly understood , medical aphorism; “Treat the patient, not the X-ray”. And so it should be.

Advertisements

8 Responses to “Chest 120: Etched in stone”

  1. annerose May 1, 2015 at 10:04 am #

    Very interesting discussion about images and the things they represent. We talked about this idea in photography a lot. It’s hard not to take the image literally. Your image is very stone-ish!

    • Xraypics May 1, 2015 at 12:01 pm #

      Thanks Anne Rose, much appreciated. Unfortunately the image somehow lost some effects when moved into WordPress, but retained essential features. The problem of perception of images is important; we should talk about it, but this isn’t the venue… Cheers, Tony

  2. sedge808 May 1, 2015 at 12:02 pm #

    yes. most interesting.

  3. Deanna Tennent Masterson May 2, 2015 at 8:26 am #

    Fascinating discussion you presented, & this image is wonderful, almost like a cave painting. I like the abstract quality.

  4. elmediat May 6, 2015 at 12:29 pm #

    Excellent post. My wife went through a tone of extra tests to figure out an abnormality was a blip of a scan – what was detected was nothing serious, just odd looking, depending on the angle of the scan & type of scan done.

    • Xraypics May 6, 2015 at 4:44 pm #

      Sadly that is an all too frequent occurrence. There’s an argument for never having an investigation done if you don;t actually need it – if something is queried you and the doctor are then both in a spiral of chasing it to find it’s exact nature. It is a hard situation to be in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: