Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures in the Musculoskeletal System

Cardinal, Étienne; Chhem, Rethy; Beauregard, Caroline

doi:10.1016/s0033-8389(05)70048-8

Cited by 103 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this technique is usually well tolerated (9), it remains invasive, expensive and not yet widely available. Moreover, it has been shown that microscopic measurements of synovial inflammation does not differ between biopsies taken blindly or under guided vision (19 (20,21). This technique has the benefit of being low cost, rapidly and easily performed without the need for exposing the patient to ionising radiation, and is widely available (22).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success Rate and Utility of Ultrasound-guided Synovial Biopsies in Clinical Practice

Najm

Orr

Heymann³

et al. 2016

J Rheumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(249 WORDS)The utility of synovial biopsy in increasing our understanding of the pathogenesis of inflammatory arthropathies, as well as in evaluating treatments is well established. Ultrasound allows synovial assessment and therefore assists in biopsying synovial tissue in a safe and well-tolerated manner.Objectives: (a) To determine the rate of success in retrieving synovial tissue using ultrasound guidance; (b) to describe the indications for US guided synovial biopsies in the clinical setting; (c) to determine how frequently the synovial biopsy can lead to a clear diagnosis and (d) to assess the quality of the synovial tissue obtained using this technique.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success Rate and Utility of Ultrasound-guided Synovial Biopsies in Clinical Practice

Najm

Orr

Heymann³

et al. 2016

J Rheumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has also been suggested that US guiding could improve the efficacy of local CS injections in inflammatory rheumatism (27)(28)(29)(30)(31). Nevertheless, despite such results, and considering that appropriate therapy might strongly depend on accurate diagnosis, studies addressing the impact of US on the anatomic diagnosis by physicians and on therapeutic decision are scarce (32).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of ultrasound imaging on local corticosteroid injections of symptomatic ankle, hind‐, and mid‐foot in chronic inflammatory diseases

D'Agostino¹,

Ayral²,

Baron³

et al. 2005

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To assess the impact of ultrasonography (US) on local corticosteroid (CS) injections of painful ankle, hindfoot, and midfoot in chronic inflammatory diseases.Methods. Consecutive patients with chronic rheumatic diseases admitted to the hospital for local CS injections of painful ankle, hindfoot, or midfoot were enrolled in this study. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed by the physician in charge of CS injections, and US examination was performed by an independent examiner blinded to the clinical and radiologic findings. According to a randomized weekly-periods design, the physician planned CS injections either aware (G1 group) or unaware (G2 group) of US results. In the latter case, he was nonetheless informed of US results after he had performed the injections. Impact of this information on the treatment planning was assessed in all cases. Prognostic impact of US was also evaluated by comparing the change in global assessment of efficacy of CS injections, in activity of the disease, and in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) subscales after 1 and 3 months, between G1 and G2 groups. Results. The knowledge of US findings led the physician to change his decision of local CS injections in 56 (82%) of 68 patients studied. Among 1,131 assessed sites, by clinical, radiographic, and US evaluation, injection was cancelled in 37 (15%) of 242 proposed sites, whereas it was decided in 74 (8%) additional sites. After 1 month, there was an improvement in G1 as compared with G2 groups. The mean ؎ SD change in WOMAC physical function subscale was 15.6 ؎ 17.5 in G1 versus 8 ؎ 13 in G2 (P ‫؍‬ 0.0305). After 3 months, only the global assessment of efficacy of CS injections was statistically greater in G1 than in G2 group (P ‫؍‬ 0.0170). Conclusion. US frequently led the physician to change his diagnosis of inflammatory lesions in painful foot, and consequently his planning of CS injections. Moreover, US could improve the response to local treatment.

show abstract

“…The advantages of percutaneous biopsy are low morbidity, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness [2,7,12]. Traditional imaging adjuncts have consisted of ultrasound (US) [2], CT [2], or MRI [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

2011 Mid-America Orthopaedic Association Dallas B. Phemister Physician in Training Award: Can Musculoskeletal Tumors be Diagnosed with Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Biopsy?

Khalil

Mott

Parsons

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Percutaneous biopsy for musculoskeletal tumors commonly relies on imaging adjuncts including ultrasound (US), CT, or MRI. These modalities however have disadvantages (US) or are cumbersome, not universally available, and costly (CT and MRI). US fusion is a novel technique that fuses previously obtained CT or MRI data with real-time US, which allows biopsies to be performed in an US suite. It has proven useful in various body systems but musculoskeletal applications remain scarce. Our goal is to evaluate the fusion technology and determine its ability to diagnose musculoskeletal tumors. Questions/Purposes We determined whether biopsies performed via US fusion compared with CT guidance provide equivalent diagnostic yield and accuracy and allow quicker biopsy scheduling and procedure times. Methods Forty-seven patients were assigned to undergo either US fusion (with MR, n = 16 or CT, n = 15) or CTguided biopsies (n = 16). We evaluated adequacy of the histologic specimen (diagnostic yield) and correlation with surgical pathology (diagnostic accuracy). We determined scheduling times and lengths of the biopsy. Results US fusion and CT-guided biopsy groups had comparable diagnostic yields (CT = 94%; US/MRI = 94%; US/CT = 93%) and accuracy (CT = 83%; US/ MRI = 90%; US/CT = 100%). US fusion biopsies were faster to schedule and perform. All procedures were safe with minimal complications.Conclusions US fusion provides a high diagnostic yield and accuracy comparable to CT-guided biopsy while performed in the convenience of an US suite. This may have resulted in the observed faster scheduling and biopsy times. Level of Evidence Level II, diagnostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

show abstract

Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures in the Musculoskeletal System

Cited by 103 publications

References 34 publications

Success Rate and Utility of Ultrasound-guided Synovial Biopsies in Clinical Practice

Success Rate and Utility of Ultrasound-guided Synovial Biopsies in Clinical Practice

Impact of ultrasound imaging on local corticosteroid injections of symptomatic ankle, hind‐, and mid‐foot in chronic inflammatory diseases

2011 Mid-America Orthopaedic Association Dallas B. Phemister Physician in Training Award: Can Musculoskeletal Tumors be Diagnosed with Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Biopsy?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About