Skip to main content

Consider the Probe Take 2: Coming to Grips with your Fundoscopic Shortcomings....

49 y/o M with hx of HTN, HLD, IDDM presents with non-traumatic L-sided painless visual loss.  The patient states that several hours prior to presentation he developed blurry vision in his L eye.  On quick examination, there are no signs of trauma.  Visual acuity is 20/120 on the L and 20/40 on the R with normal intraocular pressures bilaterally.  Pupils are briskly reactive without any photophobia or consensual photophobia.  The lids, sclera, conjunctivae are grossly normal and there are no corneal defects with fluorescein staining. 

Coming out of the room, you are concerned about this sudden-onset blurry vision.  You remember a short lecture on visual acuity changes that Dr. Schindlebeck begrudgingly gave you in between his posting about sweater vests on Pinterest.  Your differential brings concerning diagnoses including central retinal arterial occlusion (CRAO), central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO), retinal detachment, as well as vitreous hemorrhage.  Now, our patient still has some visual acuity in the affected eye which speaks against CRAO (usually profound loss of visual acuity…unable to count fingers, etc.).  CRVO is certainly on the differential, but it is usually not a time-sensitive diagnosis to make.  That leaves us with retinal detachment vs vitreous hemorrhage.  Might be a nice time to CONSIDER THE PROBE!

Brushing up on the basics, ocular US is performed utilizing the high frequency linear probe. ALWAYS make sure you clean the probe prior to examination and use sterile gel packets.  You can consider placing a tegaderm over the closed eye to further protect it.  Fear not, you will not remove their eye-lashes when ripping the teggy off.  Finally, make sure to “brace” your hand on the bridge of the nose or the cheek as to avoid applying too much pressure to your patient’s globe.  Using plenty of gel, minimal pressure is needed to visualize both superficial structures (cornea, iris, lens) as well as the posterior chamber as shown below:


It sure beats your non-dilated funduscopic exam.  Anyways, let’s say you place the probe over your patient’s affected eye and ascertain the following image:


Noting the echogenic (hyperechoic) snake-like structure floating in the vitreous that ORIGINATES from the optic nerve (the optic nerve sheath is the hypoechoic “band” passing posteriorly from the vitreous chamber, see image above for anatomy review)—you are appropriately concerned that your patient may have a retinal detachment and needs urgent ophthalmologic consultation and you put a page out to the on-call resident.

Lets imagine that your bedside ultrasound of the affected eye had produced the following images/videos:

You note more globular hyperechoic material that swirls with kinetic maneuvers.  There is no “connection” to where the optic nerve originates.  Thus, you are less concerned for a retinal detachment and are moving towards a less time-sensitive diagnosis of vitreous hemorrhage.  Recognize that sometimes these hemorrhages can be subtle and may require you to adjust your gain (“lighten” your image) to visualize the abnormality.  While you still want to provide your patient with a prompt ophthalmology f/u appointment, you recognize that you probably don’t need to page the on-call consultant at 3:30 in the morning for a patient with these findings.  

Take it to the next level:

Like all things, Ocular US takes practice.  Fortunately, at Cook County we have an abundance of visual acuity complaints.  If you start imaging all of these patients early on, you will develop a good “eye” for normal vs abnormal findings.  One “next-level” step to ocular ultrasound involved further interpreting a patient with findings concerning for a retinal detachment to determine whether the macula is involved.  It is important to remember that the macula is the part of the retina responsible for “high-acuity” and central vision.  So retinal detachments can either involve this important region termed “Mac-Off” (macula detached) or they can spare it “Mac-On.”  To assess this, you must be able to localize the macula—it is immediately lateral to the optic nerve and usually inline with the middle of the lens (direct line of vision):


Now on account of the critical role the macula fulfills, any retinal detachment that spares the macula “Mac-On” requires EMERGENT optho consultation (that’s right, pick up the phone at 4AM…).  While patients that have already detached this region “Mac-Off” patients are slightly less time-sensitive and require URGENT follow-up.  The subtle difference between these findings is noted in the images below:

“Take Home Pearls”

1) Retinal Detachments appear as a snake-like hyperechoic extension floating in the vitreous that should “originate” from the optic nerve.

2) Vitreous hemorrhage appears as less well-defined hyperechoic “globular” debris in the posterior chamber.  It may be subtle and you may have to adjust the gain to visualize it. 

3) Retinal detachments that preserve the macula “Mac- On” require EMERGENT ophthalmologic consultation, while “Mac-Off” detachments are URGENT, but non-EMERGENT. 


5 Min Sono Video Retinal Detachment vs Vitreous Hemorrhage

Chapter 31 on Introduction to Clinical Ultrasound by Matt Dawson and Mike Mallin.  Still appears to be free on Itunes.  (

Random Youtube Video with nice example of “Mac-On” vs Mac-Off” detachment:

Popular posts from this blog

Weekly Fix - Lung Ultrasound!

Check out the awesome narrated lecture below by EM US Fellow Dr. Damali Nakitende.  Read the Chou article while listening to the podcast .  For more lung US FOAMed fun check out the Thoracic page.

Consider the Probe 3: So I've found the effusion, now what?

A 74 y/o F with pmhx of metastatic breast cancer, IDDM, HTN presents after a syncopal episode.  The patient notes that for the past 2-3 days she has been experiencing some lightheadedness and shortness of breath with exertion.  She is presently undergoing chemotherapy (I'd throw in some random chemo drus here, but lets face it, we wouldn't know them anyways...) and radiation.  She notes that she hasn't been eating/drinking very well.  She denies fever, cough, hemoptysis, leg pain/swelling.  She has mild nausea but no abdominal pain. As you peek up at the monitor, you note that the patient’s HR is ~ 135 and her BP is 88/56 .  Her O2 saturation is  99% and the nurse told you that she was afebrile.  Taking a look at this patient, she looks ill-appearing and anxious.  Her extremities are cool to touch.  You quickly decide that Room 33 might not be the best place to manage this patient and that she would be better served in a RESUS station.  As you wheel the patient to RE