D Schneidmueller1, M Maier, M Mack, R Straub, I Marzi. 1. Abteilung für Unfall, -Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie der Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität Frankfurt. dorien.schneidmueller@gmx.de
Abstract
AIM: In this retrospective study, we assessed whether the use of MRI in children provides additional, therapeutically relevant information to assist in the diagnosis of joint injuries. In addition, we determined whether the usefulness of this approach is dependant on age of the child and localisation of the trauma. METHOD: MRI of 45 children aged between 3 and 16 years were analysed independently by four different investigators (two radiologists, two trauma surgeons) and assessed for their therapeutic relevance. RESULT: MRI of the knee (n=18) gave additional information in 11 patients (61%) and led to a change in the recommended therapy involving arthroscopy in seven patients (39%). MRI of the ankle (n=21) provided additional information in 12 patients (57%) and the decision for further therapy was influenced in six patients (29%), however, the indication for surgery was not influenced. The diagnosis of injuries of the elbow (n=6) was changed in four patients (67%), but the therapeutic decision was not influenced. CONCLUSION: MRI additional to conventional x-ray provides relevant information on the therapeutic procedure to be used for the knee, whereas for the ankle and the elbow MRI it rarely delivers additional information relevant to therapeutic decision making.
AIM: In this retrospective study, we assessed whether the use of MRI in children provides additional, therapeutically relevant information to assist in the diagnosis of joint injuries. In addition, we determined whether the usefulness of this approach is dependant on age of the child and localisation of the trauma. METHOD: MRI of 45 children aged between 3 and 16 years were analysed independently by four different investigators (two radiologists, two trauma surgeons) and assessed for their therapeutic relevance. RESULT: MRI of the knee (n=18) gave additional information in 11 patients (61%) and led to a change in the recommended therapy involving arthroscopy in seven patients (39%). MRI of the ankle (n=21) provided additional information in 12 patients (57%) and the decision for further therapy was influenced in six patients (29%), however, the indication for surgery was not influenced. The diagnosis of injuries of the elbow (n=6) was changed in four patients (67%), but the therapeutic decision was not influenced. CONCLUSION: MRI additional to conventional x-ray provides relevant information on the therapeutic procedure to be used for the knee, whereas for the ankle and the elbow MRI it rarely delivers additional information relevant to therapeutic decision making.
Authors: P Petit; M Panuel; F Faure; J L Jouve; B Bourliere-Najean; G Bollini; P Devred Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1996-05 Impact factor: 3.959