Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Abdominal Radiology, Original Research
Abdominal Radiology, Pictorial Essay
Anthropology and Dental Radiology, Original Research
Breast Imaging, Case Report
Breast Imaging, Original Research
Breast Imaging, Pictorial Essay
Breast Imaging, Review Article
Cardiopulmonary Imaging, Case Report
Cardiopulmonary Imaging, Case Series
Cardiopulmonary Imaging, Original Research
Cardiopulmonary Imaging, Pictorial Essay
Cardiopulmonary Imaging, Review Article
Case Report
Case Series
Dental Radiology, Case Series
Dental Radiology, Original Research
Diagnostic Radiology, Case Report
Diagnostic Radiology, Case Series
Diagnostic Radiology, Original Research
Diagnostic Radiology, Pictorial Essay
Education, Original Research
Emergency, Original Research
Gastrointestinal Imaging, Case Report
Gastrointestinal Imaging, Case Series
Gastrointestinal Imaging, Original Research
Gastrointestinal Imaging, Pictorial Essay
Genitourinary and Gynecologic Imaging, Case Report
Genitourinary and Gynecologic Imaging, Original Research
Imaging Science, Original Research
Interventional Radiology, Original Research
Letter to Editor
Musculoskeletal Imaging, Case Report
Musculoskeletal Imaging, Pictorial Essay
Musculoskeletal Imaging, Review Article
Neuroradiology , Review Article
Neuroradiology Head and Neck Imaging, Pictorial Essay
Neuroradiology, Case Report
Neuroradiology, Pictorial Essay
Neuroradiology/Head and Neck Imaging, Case Report
Neuroradiology/Head and Neck Imaging, Case Series
Neuroradiology/Head and Neck Imaging, Original Research
Neuroradiology/Head and Neck Imaging, Review Article
Nuclear Medicine, Case Report
Nuclear Medicine, Original Research
Nuclear Medicine, Pictorial Essay
Original Article
Original Research
Original Research Article
Pediatric Imaging, Case Report
Pediatric Imaging, Pictorial Essay
Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation
Radiology Business, Original Research
Research Article
Review Article
Technical Innovation
Technical Innovation, Gastrointestinal Imaging
Ultrasound, Case Report
Ultrasound, Original Research
Ultrasound, Review Article
Vascular and International Radiology, Case Report
Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Case Report
Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Case Series
Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Original Research
Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Pictorial Essay
Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Review Article
Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Short Communication
Vascular and Interventional, Original Research
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:


Superior Mesenteric Artery-Related Aortic Pseudomass as a Form of Reverberation Artifact in a 10-Year-Old Boy

Department of Radiology, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Address for correspondence: Dr. Abdel-Rauf Zeina, Department of Radiology, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, PO Box - 169, Hadera - 38100, Israel. E-mail:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher; therefore Scientific Scholar has no control over the quality or content of this article.

Source of Support: Nil

Conflict of Interest: None declared.


Artifacts are encountered routinely in clinical ultrasonography practice. The ability to recognize and eliminate potentially correctable ultrasound artifacts is of great importance to image quality improvement and optimal patient care. We describe an example of a superior mesenteric artery-related pseudomass as a form of reverberation artifact that could lead to misinterpretation of sonographic findings. We present the ultrasonographic and computed tomography angiography findings and give an explanation for the appearance of the artifact.


Aortic pseudomass
computed tomography angiography
sonographic artifact
superior mesenteric artery


In radiologic imaging, the term artifact describes any part of an image that does not accurately represent the anatomic structures of the subject being evaluated.[12] In ultrasonography (US), artifacts may result in the appearance of structures in an image that are not present anatomically. Alternatively, a structure that is present anatomically may be missing from an image. US is prone to numerous imaging artifacts that are commonly encountered in clinical practice.[1] The majority of these can be interpreted as “by-products” of the physical process of ultrasound image generation. Most of them can be explained at a basic level by an understanding of the form of the focused sound beam, the interaction of sound with tissue, and assumptions made about the spatial assignment of reflected echoes.[3] Beam width, side lobe, reverberation, comet tail, ring-down, mirror-image, speed displacement, refraction, attenuation, shadowing, and increased through-transmission artifacts are encountered routinely in clinical practice. If misinterpreted, ultrasound artifacts can lead to serious misdiagnosis. To avoid confusion, radiologists should be able to recognize artifacts when they occur.


We describe a case of a 10-year-old boy with acute abdominal pain, an unremarkable physical examination, and normal blood test. Abdominal sonography was performed using a 4–6 MHz curvilinear probe and a 7–11 MHz linear probe. US showed a hyperechoic well-defined ovoid nonocclusive intraluminal mass in the abdominal aorta between the origin of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and the ostia of the renal arteries, closely related to the origin of the SMA [Figure 1a]. Color Doppler examination revealed a normal color flow pattern with no definite mass lesion or intimal dissection flap [Figure 1b]. A computed tomography angiography (CTA) effectively ruled out an aortic intraluminal filling defect [Figure 1c]. Due to mismatched findings of US versus CTA, the appearance of an aortic mass eventually proved to be an artifact, probably due to acoustic reverberation, not a thrombus.

Figure 1: 10-year-old boy with acute abdominal pain. (a) Sagittal grayscale sonographic image of the aorta shows an echogenic intraluminal filling defect (arrow) at the origin of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA). (b) Color Doppler image shows the normal flow pattern in the SMA with no definite mass lesion or intraluminal dissection flap. (c) Sagittal CT angiography reformatted image shows normal abdominal aorta and SMA (arrow) with no evidence of filling defect or dissection. (d) Sagittal sonographic image of the abdominal aorta without the SMA in the scan plane confirms no intraluminal or mural aortic abnormality.


The incidence of an aortic thrombus or intravascular mass in children is extremely rare.[4] The former can be seen as a complication of intra-arterial catheter placement in a neonate and is occasionally seen in a young patient with structural aortic anomalies, cyanotic heart disease, or a prothrombotic state, or secondary to trauma, dehydration, or sepsis.[5] Our patient had none of the above.

Abdominal sonography identified a hyperechoic nonocclusive intraluminal mass in the abdominal aorta between the origin of the SMA and the ostia of the renal arteries, closely related to the origin of the SMA, without Color Doppler abnormalities. Reimaging the patient's aorta in the supine position in multiple planes, without including the SMA, could not reproduce the filling defect [Figure 1d]. The lesion was considered an SMA-related reflection pseudomass (or mirror-image artifact). This is a form of reverberation artifact that is related to the presence or absence of the SMA between the aorta and transducer. Such an artifact can occur from reverberations between a mass and an adjacent highly reflective surface in B-Mode imaging. The insonating beam is partially mirrored on the posterior wall of the SMA in the passage from low-impedance blood to high-impedance fat between the SMA and the aorta. Thus, the fat anterior to the SMA is reflected into the aortic lumen, resulting in an intraluminal echogenic artifact.[4] The artifact could be operator dependent and is generated when the transducer, SMA, and aorta are in alignment. When scanning the aorta by the same radiologist or another independent operator outside this plane, no such artifact can be identified.


In this report, we have presented the detection of a hyperechoic nonocclusive intraluminal mass in the abdominal aorta between the origin of the SMA and the ostia of the renal arteries. To avoid erroneous conclusions and unnecessary tests and procedures, the aorta should be scanned in multiple planes, both with and without the SMA, to confirm whether the lesion disappears and should be interpreted as a reverberation artifact from the SMA. This report highlights the importance of considering the possibility of an artifact when the findings of radiologic imaging are improbable or inconsistent with the clinical findings. When diagnostic uncertainty persists, alternate noninvasive forms of vascular imaging, such as contrast-enhanced CT or magnetic resonance angiography, should be performed.


  1. , , , . US artifacts. Radiographics. 2009;29:1179-1189.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , . Diagnostic Ultrasound Principles and Instruments. (5th ed). Philadelphia, Pa: Saunders; . p. 147-57.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , . Sonographic artifacts and their origins. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;156:1267-72.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , . Abdominal aortic pseudomass in a child: A diagnostic red herring. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:307-10.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , . Risk factors associated with umbilical vascular catheter-associated thrombosis in newborn infants. J Paediatr Child Health. 1999;35:460-5.
    [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views

PDF downloads
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
Show Sections