P Stein1, C Lückerath1, C Melzig1, M Bülhoff2, M Tanner2, H U Kauczor1, C Rehnitz3. 1. Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 2. Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 3. Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland. christoph.rehnitz@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Imaging of the postoperative shoulder joint includes complex, diagnostically challenging changes regarding the anatomical structures. OBJECTIVES: Case-based presentation of common surgical procedures, expected postoperative findings, and typical complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Interdisciplinary evaluation of (didactically instructive) cases and discussion of pertinent literature and expert opinions. RESULTS: Presentation of normal postoperative findings and complications after subacromial decompression, surgical treatment of rotator cuff lesions, SLAP (superior labral anterior to posterior) lesions/lesions of the long biceps tendon, Bankart lesions as well as instability-related procedures and after shoulder arthroplasty. Discussion of the appropriate use of imaging methods with a focus on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which are supplemented by computed tomography (CT), and conventional x‑ray images. CONCLUSION: The broad spectrum of complex findings as well as the evermore developing and thereby changing surgical procedures result in significant challenges in the radiological evaluation of the postoperative shoulder joint. To differentiate physiological reactions from pathological changes it is necessary to have general knowledge of the common surgical procedures, expected postoperative findings and possible complications. A variety imaging modalities can be used to further advance diagnostic precision.
BACKGROUND: Imaging of the postoperative shoulder joint includes complex, diagnostically challenging changes regarding the anatomical structures. OBJECTIVES: Case-based presentation of common surgical procedures, expected postoperative findings, and typical complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Interdisciplinary evaluation of (didactically instructive) cases and discussion of pertinent literature and expert opinions. RESULTS: Presentation of normal postoperative findings and complications after subacromial decompression, surgical treatment of rotator cuff lesions, SLAP (superior labral anterior to posterior) lesions/lesions of the long biceps tendon, Bankart lesions as well as instability-related procedures and after shoulder arthroplasty. Discussion of the appropriate use of imaging methods with a focus on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which are supplemented by computed tomography (CT), and conventional x‑ray images. CONCLUSION: The broad spectrum of complex findings as well as the evermore developing and thereby changing surgical procedures result in significant challenges in the radiological evaluation of the postoperative shoulder joint. To differentiate physiological reactions from pathological changes it is necessary to have general knowledge of the common surgical procedures, expected postoperative findings and possible complications. A variety imaging modalities can be used to further advance diagnostic precision.
Authors: William D Prickett; Sharlene A Teefey; Leesa M Galatz; Ryan P Calfee; William D Middleton; Ken Yamaguchi Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Sylvain R Duc; Bernard Mengiardi; Christian W A Pfirrmann; Bernhard Jost; Juerg Hodler; Marco Zanetti Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Frank McCormick; Sanjeev Bhatia; Peter Chalmers; Anil Gupta; Nikhil Verma; Anthony A Romeo Journal: Orthop Clin North Am Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 2.472
Authors: Franz S Kralinger; Karl Golser; Ralph Wischatta; Markus Wambacher; Gernot Sperner Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2002 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Yoav Morag; Jon A Jacobson; Bruce Miller; Michel De Maeseneer; Gandikota Girish; David Jamadar Journal: Radiographics Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.333