Ultrasound guidance for needle aspiration of the hip in patients with painful hip prosthesis

Komppa, G H; Northern, James R.; Haas, David; Lisecki, Edward J.; Ghaed, Nasser

doi:10.1002/jcu.1870130614

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent published medical data assign higher drug deposition accuracy and higher efficacy in comparison to blind ma-noeuvres along with better procedural and postprocedural pain and functional outcome [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. All these advantages together with the possibility to perform interventional manoeuvres quickly and safely, immediately after the MSUS evaluation, in the same room and by the same physician, using a non-radiant imaging tool, generate an important economic impact on the healthcare system due to the direct and indirect cost savings [16,21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Musculoskeletal ultrasound guided manoeuvres – security profile

Micu¹,

Vlad

Bolboacă

et al. 2014

Med Ultrason

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In daily rheumatology clinical practice, routine interventional musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) guided maneuvers such as aspiration, intraarticular or periarticular drug injections require efficient cleaning and disinfection methods for both transducer and patient's skin. Aim: To study the efficacy of probe and skin disinfection measures after using simple protocols, to identify the prevalence of septic and other drug related side effects after MSUS guided interventions and to quantify the total procedure time. Material and methods: Recruitment of consecutive patients with different joint/ periarticular MSUS guided interventions was made in 3 medical centers. Bacterial load was determined on the transducers footprint after dry cleaning with the removal of any gel trace and on patient's skin after rigorous skin disinfection with either Bethadine or alcohol 70° and Bethadine. Non-sterile gel was used as an ultrasound transmission medium. The time spent for some of the invasive procedures was quantified. Results: Nine hundred and ninety eight MSUS guided interventional maneuvers were performed in 945 patients with inflammatory and degenerative musculoskeletal pathologies. Staphylococcus epidermidis was identified in 13.33% cases of the skin bacterial load analysis and in 37.50% cases of the footprint analysis. In two patients pathogenetic germs were detected on the skin. No septic post-procedural complications were reported. In 0.6% of the cohort other side effects occurred: aseptic osteonecrosis, skin depigmentation at injection site and iatrogenic microcristaline reactions. The median time frame dedicated to the intervention was 6 minutes. Conclusion: Rigorous transducer dry cleaning and Bethadine/ Bethadine and alcohol 70° skin disinfection are efficacious methods. The risk for septic complications and other drug related side effects related to MSUS guided injections is very low in this context. A correct injection technique must accompany the previous requests. Rapid and safe interventional maneuvers reduce the risks and control the costs of the healthcare system.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Musculoskeletal ultrasound guided manoeuvres – security profile

Micu¹,

Vlad

Bolboacă

et al. 2014

Med Ultrason

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 Ultrasonographically guided arthrocentesis has also been described after hip arthroplasty. [2][3][4] Our technique of hip injection uses the same basic principles described for aspiration. In our department, all injections and aspirations in both native and prosthetic hips are performed using ultrasonographic guidance.…”

Section: Methods and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasonographic guidance for injections of local steroids in the native hip.

Carson

Wong

1999

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…4), and its use in painful total hip replacements has been described. [5][6][7] Foldes et al reported 92.8% sensitivity and 83% specificity for sonographic detection of effusion after arthroplasty, but no quantifiable criteria for diagnosing the effusion were given. 8 In a comparison of 15 asymptomatic patients with total hip replacements and 33 patients with painful hip arthroplasties, van Holsbeeck et al found that the distance between the anterior pseudocapsule and the anterior cortex of the femur is normally less than 3.2 mm and that patients with infected hip replacements had large joint effusions with a mean capsule-to-bone distance of 10.2 mm.…”

Section: Hip Arthroplastymentioning

confidence: 99%

Sonography of Joint Replacements

Miller

2006

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sonography is ideally suited for the evaluation of joint effusion, synovial thickening, and the ligaments and tendons surrounding a joint replacement because it is not hampered by the dephasing artifact of magnetic resonance imaging or the beam-hardening streak artifact of computed tomographic scanning. Although it is unable to visualize deep within the joint or into the bone surrounding an arthroplasty component, its dynamic capability allows evaluation of joint kinematics and its real-time capability can guide interventional procedures. This article reviews the sonographic appearances of complications of arthroplasty of the shoulder, hip, and knee.

show abstract

Ultrasound guidance for needle aspiration of the hip in patients with painful hip prosthesis

Cited by 18 publications

References 4 publications

Musculoskeletal ultrasound guided manoeuvres – security profile

Musculoskeletal ultrasound guided manoeuvres – security profile

Ultrasonographic guidance for injections of local steroids in the native hip.

Sonography of Joint Replacements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About