Background:Hip microinstability is a diagnosis gaining increasing interest. Physical examination tests to identify microinstability have not been objectively investigated using intraoperative confirmation of instability as a reference standard.Purpose:To determine the test characteristics and diagnostic accuracy of 3 physical examination maneuvers in the detection of hip microinstability.Study Design:Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.Methods:A review was conducted of 194 consecutive hip arthroscopic procedures performed by a sports medicine surgeon at a tertiary-care academic center. Physical examination findings of interest, including the abduction–hyperextension–external rotation (AB-HEER) test, the prone instability test, and the hyperextension–external rotation (HEER) test, were obtained from prospectively collected data. The reference standard was intraoperative identification of instability based on previously published objective criteria. Test characteristics, including sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy, were calculated for each test as well as for combinations of tests.Results:A total of 109 patients were included in the analysis. The AB-HEER test was most accurate, with a sensitivity of 80.6% (95% CI, 70.8%-90.5%) and a specificity of 89.4% (95% CI, 80.5%-98.2%). The prone instability test had a low sensitivity (33.9%) but a very high specificity (97.9%). The HEER test performed second in both sensitivity (71.0%) and specificity (85.1%). The combination of multiple tests with positive findings did not yield significantly greater accuracy. All tests had high positive predictive values (range, 86.3%-95.5%) and moderate negative predictive values (range, 52.9%-77.8%). When all 3 tests had positive findings, there was a 95.0% (95% CI, 90.1%-99.9%) chance that the patient had microinstability.Conclusion:The AB-HEER test most accurately predicted hip instability, followed by the HEER test and the prone instability test. However, the high specificity of the prone instability test makes it a useful test to “rule in” abnormalities. A positive result from any test predicted hip instability in 86.3% to 90.9% of patients, but a negative test result did not conclusively rule out hip instability, and other measures should be considered in making the diagnosis. The use of these tests may aid the clinician in diagnosing hip instability, which has been considered a difficult diagnosis to make because of its dynamic nature.
Background:There is increasing evidence supporting the association between frailty and adverse outcomes after surgery. There is, however, no consensus on how frailty should be assessed and used to inform treatment. In this review, we aimed to synthesize the current literature on the use of frailty as a predictor of adverse outcomes following orthopaedic surgery by (1) identifying the frailty instruments used and (2) evaluating the strength of the association between frailty and adverse outcomes after orthopaedic surgery.Methods:A systematic review was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify articles that reported on outcomes after orthopaedic surgery within frail populations. Only studies that defined frail patients using a frailty instrument were included. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Study demographic information, frailty instrument information (e.g., number of items, domains included), and clinical outcome measures (including mortality, readmissions, and length of stay) were collected and reported.Results:The initial search yielded 630 articles. Of these, 177 articles underwent full-text review; 82 articles were ultimately included and analyzed. The modified frailty index (mFI) was the most commonly used frailty instrument (38% of the studies used the mFI-11 [11-item mFI], and 24% of the studies used the mFI-5 [5-item mFI]), although a large variety of instruments were used (24 different instruments identified). Total joint arthroplasty (22%), hip fracture management (17%), and adult spinal deformity management (15%) were the most frequently studied procedures. Complications (71%) and mortality (51%) were the most frequently reported outcomes; 17% of studies reported on a functional outcome.Conclusions:There is no consensus on the best approach to defining frailty among orthopaedic surgery patients, although instruments based on the accumulation-of-deficits model (such as the mFI) were the most common. Frailty was highly associated with adverse outcomes, but the majority of the studies were retrospective and did not identify frailty prospectively in a prediction model. Although many outcomes were described (complications and mortality being the most common), there was a considerable amount of heterogeneity in measurement strategy and subsequent strength of association. Future investigations evaluating the association between frailty and orthopaedic surgical outcomes should focus on prospective study designs, long-term outcomes, and assessments of patient-reported outcomes and/or functional recovery scores.Clinical Relevance:Preoperatively identifying high-risk orthopaedic surgery patients through frailty instruments has the potential to improve patient outcomes. Frailty screenings can create opportunities for targeted intervention efforts and guide patient-provider decision-making.
The technology of musculoskeletal MRI imaging is advancing at a dramatic rate. MR imaging is now done at medium and higher field strengths with more specialized surface coils and with more variable pulse sequences and post processing techniques than ever before. These numerable technical advances are advantageous as they lead to an increased signal to noise ratio and increased variety of soft tissue contrast options. However, at the same time they potentially produce more imaging artifacts when compared with past techniques. Substantial technical advances have considerable clinical challenges in musculoskeletal radiology such as postoperative patient imaging, cartilage mapping, and molecular imaging. In this review, we consider technical advances in hardware and software of musculoskeletal MR imaging along with their clinical applications.
Conventional, static magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is able to provide a vast amount of information regarding the anatomy and pathology of the musculoskeletal system. However, patients, especially those whose pain is position dependent or elucidated by movement, may benefit from more advanced imaging techniques that allow for the acquisition of functional information. This manuscript reviews a variety of advancements in magnetic resonance imaging techniques that are used to image the musculoskeletal system dynamically, while in motion or under load. The methodologies, advantages and drawbacks of Stress MRI, Cine PC MRI and Real-Time MRI are discussed as each has helped to advance the field by providing a scientific basis for understanding normal and pathological musculoskeletal anatomy and function. Advancements in dynamic MR imaging will certainly lead to improvements in the understanding, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. It is difficult to anticipate that dynamic MRI will replace conventional MRI, however, dynamic MRI may provide additional valuable information to findings of conventional MRI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.