Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures

Kumbhare, Dinesh; Singh, Dhanveer; Rathbone, H Alasdair; Gunn, Madison; Grosman‐Rimon, Liza; Vadasz, Brian; Clarke, Hance; Peng, Philip

doi:10.1097/aap.0000000000000572

Cited by 35 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…12 These areas may be hypoechogenic on ultrasonography, presenting as grade 1C on the SEM. As a trigger point evolves, discrete regions in the taut band become stiffer but remain hypoechogenic on ultrasonography, [39][40][41] presenting as grade 1D on the SEM. A chronically stiff muscle can stimulate the deposition of connective tissue due to lack of movement, making the muscle slightly more echogenic, and presenting as grade 2C on the SEM.…”

Section: Clinical Utility Of the Stiffness-echogenicity Matrixmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stiffness and echogenicity: Development of a stiffness-echogenicity matrix for clinical problem solving

Stecco

Pirri²,

et al. 2019

Eur J Transl Myol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of soft tissue stiffness is important to evaluate many neuromusculoskeletal conditions. Several tools have been proposed for the assessment of stiffness, but ultrasonography appears to be most practical. The reflection of ultrasound waves as it travels through tissue enables assessment of tissue echogenicity, which is influenced by the characteristics of the sound wave as well as the characteristics of the tissue through which it passes, such as the amount of fat and fibrous tissue. However, tissue stiffness is not directly proportional to its echogenicity. Hence evaluation of echogenicity, as a stand-alone technique, is inadequate to describe its mechanical properties. The aim of this manuscript is to present a method of combining echogenicity evaluation by ultrasound and stiffness evaluation by palpation to better describe the mechanical properties of muscle using a stiffness-echogenicity matrix.

show abstract

Section: Clinical Utility Of the Stiffness-echogenicity Matrixmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stiffness and echogenicity: Development of a stiffness-echogenicity matrix for clinical problem solving

Stecco

Pirri²,

et al. 2019

Eur J Transl Myol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are some controversies regarding the US visualization of trigger points in MPS patients [12]. The least common application of US-guided DN is the visualization of trigger points [14,20,24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The least common application of US-guided DN is the visualization of trigger points [14,20,24]. Previous studies revealed that US fails to identify the exact echogenicity changes [12]. The mechanism of action of DN in pain relief among patients with MPS remains undiscovered [9].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…US is an essential tool in diagnosing and treating injuries to soft tissues, including the muscles, tendons, and nerves [2,12]. B-mode and linear probe US interventions are used to monitor the condition of musculoskel-M etal tissues [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…US can visualize various structures of the musculoskeletal tissue with particular characteristics. For instance, the muscle and the surrounding fascia are observed to be hypoechoic in US, whereas the skin is a hyperechoic structure [12,13]. US-guided interventions include surgical and conservative treatment approaches.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Effects of Ultrasound-guided Dry Needling on Patients With Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Takamjani

Ezzati

Khani

et al. 2020

IRJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Dry Needling (DN) is a novel and effective intervention for patients with Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS). Some characteristics, such as needle penetration depth, needle insertion into the target muscle, and trigger points must be identified in this intervention. The Ultrasound (US)-guided DN is a technique that involves needle insertion at the site of injury and the simulation of tissue injury and inflammation under US guidance; it indicates the needle insertion site to ensure that it does not penetrate the adjacent tissues. The current study aimed to review previous studies regarding the effects of US-guided DN on MPS. Methods: A search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar, Springer, and Science Direct databases to retrieve studies published from 2010 to March 2020. We included investigations regarding the effects of US-guided DN on the treatment of MPS. The following keywords and MeSH terms were used in the search process: “ultrasound-guided, musculoskeletal ultrasonography, myofascial pain syndrome, trigger points, and dry needling.” Results: A total of 47 relevant articles were retrieved. However, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the review, 11 articles were finally selected. All studies reported significant pain relief following the use of US-guided DN in patients with MPS. Discussion: Considering the precise visualization of the site of muscle involvement, precise needle insertion, and reduction of the risk of further injury in US-guided DN may be a useful approach for MPS management in short-term and long-term studies.

show abstract

Ultrasound‐guided interventions during pregnancy for lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment: A retrospective review

Comlek

2020

J of Clinical Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Current conventional therapeutic strategies for lumbosacral pain during pregnancy are usually inadequate and data regarding interventional analgesic procedures feasible in pregnant women is scarce. We decided to retrospectively review our experience of ultrasound-guided pain management procedures in pregnant women with lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment. Methods: Twenty women in the second trimester of pregnancy with lumbosacral pain developed during pregnancy unresponsive to conservative treatments who underwent the following ultrasound-guided pain interventions were included: sacroiliac joint, caudal epidural, interlaminar epidural, and trigger point injections. All patients were followed up until early postnatal period using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Results: All but one patient achieved satisfactory pain control throughout the pregnancy with a single injection. Significant declines in ODI and VAS scores was attained within the first 2 weeks and first week of intervention, respectively, which was maintained thereafter until early postnatal period. Conclusions: Injections used for effective interventional pain management in nonpregnant populations seem to represent an effective and safe method also for pregnant women when performed under ultrasound guidance, with rapid onset and enduring duration of action until the time of delivery.

show abstract

Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures

Cited by 35 publications

References 39 publications

Stiffness and echogenicity: Development of a stiffness-echogenicity matrix for clinical problem solving

Stiffness and echogenicity: Development of a stiffness-echogenicity matrix for clinical problem solving

The Effects of Ultrasound-guided Dry Needling on Patients With Myofascial Pain Syndrome

Ultrasound‐guided interventions during pregnancy for lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment: A retrospective review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About