Ferran Abat1, Hakan Alfredson2, Jocelio Campos3, Gabriel Planells4, Jordi Torras4, Marc Madruga-Parera4,5, Alfonso Rodriguez-Baeza6. 1. Sports Orthopaedic Department, ReSport Clinic, Universitat Autònoma Barcelona, Passeig Fabra i Puig 47, 08030, Barcelona, Spain. abat@resportclinic.com. 2. Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Sports Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 3. Sports Orthopaedic Department, ReSport Clinic, Universitat Autònoma Barcelona, Passeig Fabra i Puig 47, 08030, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Department, ReSport Clinic, Universitat Autònoma Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 5. University School of Health and Sport (EUSES), University of Girona, Girona, Spain. 6. Department of Morphological Sciences, Human Anatomy Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma Barcelona, Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present study aims to analyze the accuracy of injections aimed to hit the proximal and depth part of the patellar tendon "target point" in patellar tendinopathy, comparing ultrasound-guided or non-ultrasound-guided (blind) injections. METHODS: A cadaver randomized study was carried out. Injections were performed under ultrasound control, as well as blinded. There were 26 knees from fresh cadavers and injections were placed by 26 practitioners with experience in the use of musculoskeletal ultrasound and injection treatment. Each participant performed 6 ultrasound-guided and 6 blind punctures in different cadaveric specimens. This provided 312 injections that were analyzed in 2 different anatomical cuts, thus providing a database of 624 measurements for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed (p < 0.0001) in the distance from the target point between the ultrasound-guided and the non-guided infiltrations. The "unguided" injections were considered to have been performed on average 10 mm away from the target point compared to the "ultrasound-guided" injections. The ultrasound-guided injections obtained an accuracy of 74.36% while the "non-ultrasound-guided" injections obtained an accuracy of 11.54% (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of ultrasound to guide the positioning of injections on the dorsal side of the proximal patellar tendon had a significantly higher accuracy compared to blind injections. The finding provides knowledge of importance for injection treatment.
PURPOSE: The present study aims to analyze the accuracy of injections aimed to hit the proximal and depth part of the patellar tendon "target point" in patellar tendinopathy, comparing ultrasound-guided or non-ultrasound-guided (blind) injections. METHODS: A cadaver randomized study was carried out. Injections were performed under ultrasound control, as well as blinded. There were 26 knees from fresh cadavers and injections were placed by 26 practitioners with experience in the use of musculoskeletal ultrasound and injection treatment. Each participant performed 6 ultrasound-guided and 6 blind punctures in different cadaveric specimens. This provided 312 injections that were analyzed in 2 different anatomical cuts, thus providing a database of 624 measurements for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed (p < 0.0001) in the distance from the target point between the ultrasound-guided and the non-guided infiltrations. The "unguided" injections were considered to have been performed on average 10 mm away from the target point compared to the "ultrasound-guided" injections. The ultrasound-guided injections obtained an accuracy of 74.36% while the "non-ultrasound-guided" injections obtained an accuracy of 11.54% (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of ultrasound to guide the positioning of injections on the dorsal side of the proximal patellar tendon had a significantly higher accuracy compared to blind injections. The finding provides knowledge of importance for injection treatment.
Authors: Richard E Sharpe; Levon N Nazarian; David C Levin; Laurence Parker; Vijay M Rao Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Johannes Schindelin; Ignacio Arganda-Carreras; Erwin Frise; Verena Kaynig; Mark Longair; Tobias Pietzsch; Stephan Preibisch; Curtis Rueden; Stephan Saalfeld; Benjamin Schmid; Jean-Yves Tinevez; Daniel James White; Volker Hartenstein; Kevin Eliceiri; Pavel Tomancak; Albert Cardona Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: F Abat; H Alfredson; M Cucchiarini; H Madry; A Marmotti; C Mouton; J M Oliveira; H Pereira; G M Peretti; C Spang; J Stephen; C J A van Bergen; L de Girolamo Journal: J Exp Orthop Date: 2018-09-24