Fulltext

Prospective evaluation of two different injection techniques for MR arthrography of the hip

Duc, Sylvain ; Hodler, Juerg ; Schmid, Marius ; Zanetti, Marco ; Mengiardi, Bernard ; Dora, Claudio ; Pfirrmann, Christian

In: European Radiology, 2006, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 473-478

Ajouter à la liste personnelle
    Titre
    • Prospective evaluation of two different injection techniques for MR arthrography of the hip
    Auteur
    • Duc, Sylvain. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Hodler, Juerg. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Schmid, Marius. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Zanetti, Marco. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Mengiardi, Bernard. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Dora, Claudio. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Pfirrmann, Christian. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland
    Type de document
    • Postprint
    Langue
    • Anglais
    Publié dans
    • European Radiology, 2006, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 473-478. Springer-Verlag; http://www.springer.de
    Autre version électronique
    Identifiant OAI-PMH
    • oai:doc.rero.ch:312084
    Summary
    The aim of the study was to evaluate prospectively the technical feasibility and discomfort of two different injection techniques for MR arthrography of the hip. Sixty-one consecutive patients undergoing MR arthrography of the hip (68 hips) were randomly injected either at the femoral head (36 hips) or the femoral neck (32 hips). The patients rated discomfort during and 0-72h after arthrography using a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0="did not feel anything”, 100="unbearable”). The volume injected, the distance between the needle tract and the neurovascular bundle, the duration of the procedure and the extra-articular contrast leakage were measured. No significant differences were found for the volume injected, the distance between the needle tract and the neurovascular bundle, or the procedure duration. Volume of extra-articular contrast leakage was statistically significantly different (head 1±2cm3, neck 3±5cm3, P=0.024). The VAS score for needle advancement was significantly different (head 25±20, neck 19±23, P=0.031). No significant differences were found for the VAS score regarding delayed discomfort. Before the examination the arthrography-related discomfort was overestimated by 74% (50/68), correctly anticipated by 22% (15/68) and underestimated by 4% (3/68) of the patients. MR-related discomfort was overestimated by 32% (22/68), correctly anticipated by 57% (39/68) and underestimated by 10% (7/68) of the patients. Both hip puncture techniques were well tolerated. The neck injection technique produced less discomfort and was associated with greater extra-articular contrast leakage