We performed a prospective study to evaluate the values of dynamic four-dimensional computed tomography in assessing suspected chronic scapholunate instability. Forty patients were evaluated with radiographs, arthrography, and four-dimensional computed tomography. On plain radiographs and computed tomography, we found 16 patients with definite scapholunate instability, five with questionable scapholunate instability, and 19 with absence of scapholunate instability. We used four-dimensional computed tomography to evaluate the size of the scapholunate gap during radioulnar deviation. The mean and maximal values of the gap size were lowest in the patients with absence of scapholunate instability and highest in those with definite scapholunate instability. When comparing the scapholunate gap sizes of the patients with absent and questionable scapholunate instability, the range of the gap sizes was significantly higher in the patients with questionable scapholunate instability. We conclude that four-dimensional computed tomography aids assessment of chronic scapholunate instability, which allows the differentiation between patients without and those with definite or questionable scapholunate instability. Level of evidence: II

Background In this study we sought to evaluate the contribution of dynamic four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) relative to the standard imaging work-up for the identification of the dorsal intercalated segment instability (DISI) in patients with suspected chronic scapholunate instability (SLI). Methods Forty patients (22 men, 18 women; mean age 46.5 ± 13.1 years) with suspected SLI were evaluated prospectively with radiographs, arthrography, and 4DCT. Based on radiographs and CT arthrography, three groups were defined: positive SLI (n = 16), negative SLI (n = 19), and questionable SLI (n = 5). Two independent readers used 4DCT to evaluate the lunocapitate angle (LCA) (mean, max, coefficient of variation [CV], and range values) during radioulnar deviation. Results The interobserver variability of the 4DCT variables was deemed excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.79 to 0.96). Between the three groups, there was no identifiable difference for the LCAmean. The LCAmax values were lower in the positive SLI group (88 degrees) than the negative SLI group (102 degrees). The positive SLI group had significantly lower LCAcv (7% vs. 12%, p = 0.02) and LCArange (18 vs. 27 degrees, p = 0.01) values than the negative SLI group. The difference in all the LCA parameters between the positive SLI group and the questionable SLI group was not statistically significant. When comparing the negative SLI and questionable SLI groups, the LCAcv (p = 0.03) and LCArange (p = 0.02) values were also significantly different. The best differentiation between patients with and without SLI was obtained with a LCAcv and LCArange threshold values of 9% (specificity of 63% and sensitivity of 62%) and 20 degrees (specificity of 71% and sensitivity of 63%), respectively. Conclusion In this study, 4DCT appeared as a quantitative and reproducible relevant tool for the evaluation of DISI deformity in cases of SLI, including for patients presenting with questionable initial radiography findings. Level of evidence This is a Level III study.

No abstract

No abstract