Literature DB >> 14992704

The anterior ankle impingement syndrome: diagnostic value of oblique radiographs.

Johannes L Tol1, Ronald A W Verhagen, Rover Krips, Mario Maas, Ronald Wessel, Marcel G W Dijkgraaf, C Niek van Dijk.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic value of an oblique radiograph, in addition to a lateral radiograph, for detecting osteophytes in the anterior ankle impingement syndrome was evaluated in a prospective study. The hypothesis was that the application of a lateral radiograph is insufficient to detect osteophytes that are located in the anteromedial aspect of the ankle joint. Oblique anteromedial impingement (AMI) radiographs were hypothesized to be a relevant adjunct, because of their utility to detect these anteromedially located osteophytes.
METHODS: Presence or absence of tibial and talar osteophytes on both radiographs was compared with the combined findings of CT, MRI scan, and arthroscopic surgery. Estimates of test characteristics were obtained for 60 consecutive patients with an anterior ankle impingement syndrome.
RESULTS: It was shown that the sensitivity of lateral radiographs for detecting anterior tibial and talar osteophytes was 40% and 32%, respectively (specificity, 70% and 82%). When the lateral radiograph was combined with an oblique AMI radiograph, these figures increased to 85% and 73%, respectively (specificity decreased to 45% and 68%). This increase was due to the high sensitivity of the oblique AMI radiographs for detecting anteromedial osteophytes (93% for tibial and 67% for talar osteophytes).
CONCLUSION: A lateral radiograph is insufficient to detect all anteriorly located osteophytes. An oblique AMI radiograph is a useful adjunct to routine radiographs and is recommended to detect anteromedial tibial and talar osteophytes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14992704     DOI: 10.1177/107110070402500205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot Ankle Int        ISSN: 1071-1007            Impact factor:   2.827


  9 in total

1.  Update on anterior ankle impingement.

Authors:  Tanawat Vaseenon; Annunziato Amendola
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2012-06

Review 2.  Impingement syndromes of the ankle.

Authors:  Philip Robinson
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-05-15       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  [Impingement syndrome of the ankle].

Authors:  R-I Milos; L B Fritz; C Schueller-Weidekamm
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  US in ankle impingement syndrome.

Authors:  Lionel Pesquer; Stephane Guillo; Philippe Meyer; Olivier Hauger
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2013-11-26

5.  Radiographic predictability of cartilage damage in medial ankle osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Jeong-Seok Moon; Jae-Chan Shim; Jin-Soo Suh; Woo-Chun Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  Persistent ankle pain following a sprain: a review of imaging.

Authors:  Ramy Mansour; Zaid Jibri; Sridhar Kamath; Kausik Mukherjee; Simon Ostlere
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2011-03-05

7.  Medial impingement of the ankle in athletes.

Authors:  Arthur Manoli
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.843

Review 8.  Ankle impingement.

Authors:  Kyle P Lavery; Kevin J McHale; William H Rossy; George Theodore
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2016-09-09       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Anterior impingement syndrome in dancers.

Authors:  John William O'Kane; Nancy Kadel
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2008-03
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.