Literature DB >> 21940587

MRI versus radiography of acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Ursula Nemec1, Gerhard Oberleitner, Stefan F Nemec, Michael Gruber, Michael Weber, Christian Czerny, Christian R Krestan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Acromioclavicular joint injuries are usually diagnosed by clinical and radiographic assessment with the Rockwood classification, which is crucial for treatment planning. In view of the implementation of MRI for visualization of the acromioclavicular joint, the purpose of this study was to describe the MRI findings of acromioclavicular joint dislocation in comparison with the radiographic findings. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-four patients with suspected unilateral acromioclavicular joint dislocation after acute trauma were enrolled in this prospective study. All patients underwent digital radiography and 1-T MRI with a surface phased-array coil. MRI included coronal proton density-weighted turbo spin-echo and coronal 3D T1-weighted fast field-echo water-selective sequences. The Rockwood classification was used to assess acromioclavicular joint injuries at radiography and MRI. An adapted Rockwood classification was used for MRI evaluation of the acromioclavicular joint ligaments. The classifications of acromioclavicular joint dislocations diagnosed with radiography and MRI were compared.
RESULTS: Among 44 patients with Rockwood type I-IV injuries on radiographs, classification on radiographs and MR images was concordant in 23 (52.2%) patients. At MRI, the injury was reclassified to a less severe type in 16 (36.4%) patients and to a more severe type in five (11.4%) patients. Compared with the findings according to the original Rockwood system, with the adapted system that included MRI findings, additional ligamentous lesions were found in 11 (25%) patients.
CONCLUSION: In a considerable number of patients, the MRI findings change the Rockwood type determined with radiography. In addition to clinical assessment and radiography, MRI may yield important findings on ligaments that may influence management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21940587     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.10.6378

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  17 in total

1.  Inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Rockwood classification in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  M M Schneider; M Balke; P Koenen; M Fröhlich; A Wafaisade; B Bouillon; M Banerjee
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Skeletal developmental patterns in the acromial process and distal clavicle as observed by MRI.

Authors:  Pratik Kothary; Zehava Sadka Rosenberg
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 3.  Normal development imaging pitfalls and injuries in the pediatric shoulder.

Authors:  Jonathan Zember; Pedro Vega; Ignacio Rossi; Zehava Sadka Rosenberg
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2019-11-04

Review 4.  Shoulder acromioclavicular joint reconstruction options and outcomes.

Authors:  Simon Lee; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-12

5.  Ultrasound of the coracoclavicular ligaments in the acute phase of an acromioclavicular disjonction: Comparison of radiographic, ultrasound and MRI findings.

Authors:  Marie Faruch Bilfeld; Franck Lapègue; Hélène Chiavassa Gandois; Marie Aurélie Bayol; Nicolas Bonnevialle; Nicolas Sans
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-05-28       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Concomitant glenohumeral pathologies associated with acute and chronic grade III and grade V acromioclavicular joint injuries.

Authors:  Gunnar Jensen; Peter J Millett; Dimitri S Tahal; Mireille Al Ibadi; Helmut Lill; Jan Christoph Katthagen
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Image interpolation improves the zonal analysis of cartilage T2 relaxation in MRI.

Authors:  Farid Badar; Yang Xia
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2017-04

8.  Stress radiographs for evaluating acromioclavicular joint separations in an active-duty patient population: What have we learned?

Authors:  K Aaron Shaw; John Synovec; Josef Eichinger; Christopher J Tucker; Jason A Grassbaugh; Stephen A Parada
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-02-02

9.  Acromioclavicular dislocation: postoperative evaluation of the coracoclavicular ligaments using magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Rafael Salomon Silva Faria; Fabiano Rebouças Ribeiro; Bruno de Oliveira Amin; Antonio Carlos Tenor Junior; Miguel Pereira da Costa; Cantídio Salvador Filardi Filho; Cleber Gonçalves Batista; Rômulo Brasil Filho
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2015-04-24

10.  Transarticular fixation by hook plate versus coracoclavicular stabilization by single multistrand titanium cable for acute Rockwood grade-V acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a case-control study.

Authors:  You-Shui Gao; Yue-Lei Zhang; Zi-Sheng Ai; Yu-Qiang Sun; Chang-Qing Zhang; Wei Zhang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.