Ultrasound-guided shoulder MR arthrography: comparison of rotator interval and posterior approach

Oğul, Hayri; Bayraktutan, Ummugulsum; Özgökçe, Mesut; Tuncer, Kutsi; Yuce, Ihsan; Yalçın, Ahmet; Pirimoğlu, Berhan; Sagsoz, Erdem; Kantarcı, Mecit

doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.07.006

Cited by 32 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Literatürde tarif edilmiş diğer yöntemlere üstünlüğünü kanıtlamıştır (6)(7)(8)(9)14). Fakat buna rağmen her eklemde aynı başarıyı göstermemektedir (12,16,17).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Bu nedenle kıkırdağa temas sonrası iğne minimal geri çekilerek kapsül içindeki negatif basınç içerisinde kalması sağlanır. İğnenin kıkırdağa teması sonrası geri çekilmesi nedeniyle, eklem kıkırdağı ile kapsül arasındaki mesafe enjeksiyonun başarısında önemli rol oynamaktadır (8,9,19). Biz glenohumeral ekleme enjeksiyonda posterior yaklaşımı kullandık.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Biz glenohumeral ekleme enjeksiyonda posterior yaklaşımı kullandık. Oğul ve arkadaşlarının yaptığı bir çalışmada aynı eklem sözkonusu olduğunda bile enjeksiyon prosedürleri değiştiğinde işlemin başarı şansının da değiştiği gösterilmiştir (8).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Sözkonusu çalışmada araştırmacılar, glenohumeral ekleme anterior yaklaşımda kapsül ile eklem kıkırdağı arası mesafe, posterior yaklaşımdaki kapsül ile eklem kıkırdağı mesafesinden az olduğu için ekstravazasyon ihtimalinin arttığını bildirmişlerdir (8). Bizim çalışmamızda gösterdi ki ayak bileği gibi eklem kapsül mesafesi iyi olan eklemlerde, eklem kapsül mesafesi az olan glenohumeral eklem gibi eklemlere göre başarı şansı belirgin yüksektir.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…İntraartiküler enjeksiyon için farklı metodlar bugüne kadar kullanılmıştır. Bunların arasınd a floroskopi, BT ve ultrasonografi klavuzluğu en yaygın kullanılan yöntemlerdir (5)(6)(7)(8)(9). Görüntüleme yöntemlerinin kılavuzluğu olmadan direkt …”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Deep and Superficial Joint Injections

Yalçın¹,

Polat²,

Özgökçe³

2018

Van Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Literatürde tarif edilmiş diğer yöntemlere üstünlüğünü kanıtlamıştır (6)(7)(8)(9)14). Fakat buna rağmen her eklemde aynı başarıyı göstermemektedir (12,16,17).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Deep and Superficial Joint Injections

Yalçın¹,

Polat²,

Özgökçe³

2018

Van Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shoulder MR Arthrography: Comparative Evaluation of Three Different Contrast Injection Techniques Using an Anterior Approach

Ali

Said

Elhamd

et al. 2020

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMR arthrography (MRA) is commonly used in the assessment of shoulder internal derangements. Correct intra‐articular contrast injection is required for this modality. Anterior injections under fluoroscopic, ultrasound‐guidance, or without image‐guidance have been described in the literature. However, no simultaneous comparison has been performed between the three techniques.PurposeTo compare the accuracy and performance of fluoroscopy (FL)‐guided, ultrasound (US)‐guided and non‐image‐guided intra‐articular contrast injection via an anterior approach for performing shoulder MRA.Study TypeProspective.SubjectsTwo‐hundred and ten patients (180 men and 30 women; mean age, 33 ± 12 years; range 20–60 years) with clinically suspected shoulder pathology.Field Strength/Sequence1.5T/fat‐suppressed T1‐weighted, T2‐weighted, and 3D‐gradient‐echo images.AssessmentPatients underwent shoulder MRA after anterior intra‐articular contrast injection under FL‐ or US‐guidance or without image‐guidance. Patients were randomized among the three techniques with each group comprising 70. The techniques were compared according to the accuracy of intra‐articular needle placement, attempts success rate, pain during and 24 hours after injection, procedure times, contrast extravasation rate, joint distension, and MRA diagnostic efficacy. Pain was assessed by the visual analog scale (VAS) pain‐score.Statistical TestsPearson's chi‐squared and Kruskal–Wallis tests.ResultsFL‐ and US‐guided injections (100% accuracy) were significantly more accurate than non‐image‐guided (85.7% accuracy) (P < 0.05). US‐guidance was the least painful, with statistical differences between image‐guided and non‐image‐guided techniques regarding the first attempt success rate (95.7% and 92.8% for FL‐ and US‐guided vs. 78.6% for blinded), VAS‐score 24 hours‐post‐procedure (1.7 ± 1.7, and 1.5 ± 1.4 vs. 2.2 ± 1.4), procedure time (11.9 ± 1.6, and 7.4 ± 1.7 vs. 4.3 ± 0.76 minutes), and contrast extravasation rate (5.7%, and 8.6% vs. 30%) (all P < 0.05). Procedure time was also significantly different between FL and US‐guidance (P < 0.05).Data ConclusionImaging‐guided injections are more accurate and tolerable than non‐image‐guided and should be considered to confirm intra‐articular needle position, hence adequate capsular distension and good diagnostic quality of shoulder MRA. US guidance is a less painful, rapid, and safe alternative to the FL approach.Evidence Level: 2Technical Efficacy Stage: 5.J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2021;53:481–490.

show abstract

Current Protocols for Radiographic and CT Evaluation of the Shoulder

Leung

Griffith

2019

The Shoulder

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultrasound-guided shoulder MR arthrography: comparison of rotator interval and posterior approach

Cited by 32 publications

References 20 publications

Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Deep and Superficial Joint Injections

Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Deep and Superficial Joint Injections

Shoulder MR Arthrography: Comparative Evaluation of Three Different Contrast Injection Techniques Using an Anterior Approach

Current Protocols for Radiographic and CT Evaluation of the Shoulder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About