Diagnostic ultrasound is an imaging technique that uses wide-ranging waves to produce structural images within the body. In most cases, the images are responsible for providing necessary information for guiding and analyzing several conditions and sicknesses. It assists in diagnosing the cause of pain, inflammation, and infection in internal tissues and examining an unborn child in expectant mothers (Reichel et al., 2019). In newborns, doctors use ultrasound to assess the spine, hips, and brain. The discussion shows that the pervasive energy uptake and tissue heating process can cause biological impacts from ultrasound treatment.
Many researchers have studied biological effects arising from the use of various medical technologies. In general, biological effect refers to the response of an organism, a community, or a population to changes in the surroundings (Morshedi et al., 2019). They may include respiratory disorders, hypersensitivity, allergic reactions, and infectious diseases. Physical effects can be caused by various pollutants and contaminants ingesting the human body. For instance, skin redness and damage to the eye lens may cause permanent or temporary sterility. In other circumstances, hair loss is likewise a result of biological effects. There are two main types of biological effects: stochastic and non-stochastic. The former occurs randomly, its probability is higher than its severity, and the latter’s effect severity appears linearly (Reichel et al., 2019). The growth microenvironment is an exclusive biological effect that encourages tumorigenesis and interactions between different cell populations and has been associated with ultrasound (Shankar & Pagel, 2018). Ultimately, this often results in the formation of the proliferation of the tumor microenvironment.
Ultrasound creates biological impacts by interacting with tissues through heating and cavitation. Despite the medical application, there are potential adverse-related biological effects. The energy from the activity exerts significant thermal, mechanical, genetic, and cellular effects on the body. Thermal effects can arise from regular exposure to ultrasound and have been proved to lead to adverse myelination changes resulting in neuronic material cell damage (Morshedi et al., 2019). Sonography increases temperature during imaging of the beam’s focal area and thus can cause changes in the tissue.
Further, ultrasound energy creates mechanical forces, causing temperature-related biological effects (Shankar & Pagel, 2018). A notable example is organs such as the intestines and lungs, which are most vulnerable to the effects of auditory cavitation. In addition, tissues near bones in the body are likely to experience the mechanical effects of ultrasound.
Correspondingly, exposure of cells to 4D, color developer, and 3D models, can lead to decreased cell viability and an increase in the explosion rate of human dermal fibroblast cells. Research suggests that none of the analytic sonography approaches applied during imaging induced cell programmed cell death (Reichel et al., 2019). Even though this finding indicates that the technique may affect cell viability, the probability of programmed cell death is very low. Arguably, the most studied biological effect of ultrasound relates to pregnant mothers. Ultrasound can have long-term impacts, especially with the increasing utility of ultrasound in monitoring fetuses to expose any abnormalities in the fetus. Although ultrasounds can give physicians and midwives crucial information about how pregnancy is going, the findings could be deceptive or wrong occasionally. For instance, if a woman is two months pregnant and sonography fails to detect a baby’s heartbeat, there may be a moment of panic, leading to unintended medical errors.
There are two modalities to viewing ultrasound’s biological effects: the risk-benefit analysis and the precautionary method. Most clinicians are used to the risk-benefit principle that justifies diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which reduces the risk associated with the procedure (Reichel et al., 2019). Apart from the biological effects resulting from the ultrasound, other potential risks of ultrasound are linked to the diagnostic errors caused by human beings, which can also trigger biological effects. For example, overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis can lead to false reassurance of the condition of a part of the body (Shankar & Pagel, 2018). If a pregnant woman is not appropriately scanned or the fetus’s condition is not reported accurately, the child can grow abnormally and develop deformity. Even though the impacts of ultrasonography on newborns are unreported, operators should utilize the minimum dose possible to minimize damage to tissues.
To conclude, I had mixed feelings during the scan when I underwent my first ultrasound scan. Seeing my internal body organs in 3D was a rare and unusual moment. Additionally, I was happy after the procedure ended because I discovered many things about my body that I never knew before. I had a positive clinician-patient relationship because the scan was perfectly done. My fellow students as well enjoyed going through the scanning session with me, which was a unique experience since I initially dreaded the idea of others seeing my internal organs. Learning about how medical scans work during the procedure helped me feel more comfortable and ssecure. Also I realized that it is important to have support near you when you have fear of medical examminations and tests. I equally felt delighted, especially when I asked questions before and after scanning my fellow students and got positive feedback.
References
Morshedi, M., Bakhshandeh, M., Piryaei, A., Emami, A., Zangeneh, M., Razzaghdoust, A., Ghadiri, H., & Zayeri, F. (2019). Biological Effect of Modern Fetal Ultrasound Techniques on Human Dermal Fibroblast Cells. Journal of Biomedical Physics & Engineering, 9(3), 335–344.
Reichel, D., Tripathi, M., & Perez, J. M. (2019). Biological Effects of Nanoparticles on Macrophage Polarization in the Tumor Microenvironment. Nanotheranostics, 3(1), 66–88.
Shankar, H., & Pagel, P. S. (2018). Potential Adverse Ultrasound-related Biological EffectsA Critical Review. Anesthesiology: The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, 115(5), 1109–1124.