超声引导下腋枕在MR关节造影中用于盂肱关节注射的效果。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 ACOUSTICS
Zakir Sakci, Hayri Ogul, Kutsi Tuncer, Serhat Kaya, Alper Kiziloglu, Gokhan Polat, Mecit Kantarci
{"title":"超声引导下腋枕在MR关节造影中用于盂肱关节注射的效果。","authors":"Zakir Sakci, Hayri Ogul, Kutsi Tuncer, Serhat Kaya, Alper Kiziloglu, Gokhan Polat, Mecit Kantarci","doi":"10.1002/jcu.24018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of the ultrasonography (US)-guided posterior injection technique using an axillary bolster for magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography of the shoulder joint.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study included 60 patients (30 US-guided injections with an axillary bolster, 30 US-guided injections without an axillary bolster). There were 37 men and 23 women whose ages ranged from 17 to 64 years (mean, 36.87 years). All procedures were performed by two radiologists with less than 1 year of experience in arthrographic procedures. The accuracy of the two injection techniques was compared. Extraarticular contrast material leak was graded according to the MR arthrography findings. The number of injection attempts and the effect of contrast material extravasation rate on diagnostic quality were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences between US-guided punctures with and without an axillary bolster in regard to pain (p = 0.39). Injections with an axillary bolster had a higher likelihood of success on the first attempt (p = 0.0031). Complete extravasation in the US-guided posterior approach technique without an axillary bolster was significantly higher than the US-guided posterior injection technique with an axillary bolster (p < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although there is no significant difference in pain scores for both techniques, complete contrast material extravasation is seen at a higher rate in the US-guided posterior approach injection technique without the use of an axillary bolster compared to the technique used.</p>","PeriodicalId":15386,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficiency of Axillary Bolster Use for Ultrasound-Guided Glenohumeral Joint Injection in MR Arthrography.\",\"authors\":\"Zakir Sakci, Hayri Ogul, Kutsi Tuncer, Serhat Kaya, Alper Kiziloglu, Gokhan Polat, Mecit Kantarci\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcu.24018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of the ultrasonography (US)-guided posterior injection technique using an axillary bolster for magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography of the shoulder joint.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study included 60 patients (30 US-guided injections with an axillary bolster, 30 US-guided injections without an axillary bolster). There were 37 men and 23 women whose ages ranged from 17 to 64 years (mean, 36.87 years). All procedures were performed by two radiologists with less than 1 year of experience in arthrographic procedures. The accuracy of the two injection techniques was compared. Extraarticular contrast material leak was graded according to the MR arthrography findings. The number of injection attempts and the effect of contrast material extravasation rate on diagnostic quality were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences between US-guided punctures with and without an axillary bolster in regard to pain (p = 0.39). Injections with an axillary bolster had a higher likelihood of success on the first attempt (p = 0.0031). Complete extravasation in the US-guided posterior approach technique without an axillary bolster was significantly higher than the US-guided posterior injection technique with an axillary bolster (p < 0.0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although there is no significant difference in pain scores for both techniques, complete contrast material extravasation is seen at a higher rate in the US-guided posterior approach injection technique without the use of an axillary bolster compared to the technique used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15386,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.24018\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ACOUSTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Ultrasound","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.24018","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是前瞻性评估超声(US)引导下使用腋窝支撑后路注射技术进行肩关节磁共振(MR)关节成像的准确性。材料和方法:本研究纳入60例患者(30例带腋枕的美国引导注射,30例不带腋枕的美国引导注射)。男性37例,女性23例,年龄17 ~ 64岁,平均36.87岁。所有手术均由两名关节造影经验不足1年的放射科医生进行。比较了两种注射技术的精度。根据MR关节造影结果对关节外造影剂泄漏进行分级。记录注射次数及造影剂外渗率对诊断质量的影响。结果:有和没有腋窝支撑的穿刺在疼痛方面没有显著差异(p = 0.39)。使用腋窝支撑的注射在第一次尝试时成功的可能性更高(p = 0.0031)。结论:尽管两种技术的疼痛评分没有显著差异,但与使用的技术相比,不使用腋窝枕的us引导后入路注射技术的造影剂完全外渗率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficiency of Axillary Bolster Use for Ultrasound-Guided Glenohumeral Joint Injection in MR Arthrography.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of the ultrasonography (US)-guided posterior injection technique using an axillary bolster for magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography of the shoulder joint.

Materials and methods: This study included 60 patients (30 US-guided injections with an axillary bolster, 30 US-guided injections without an axillary bolster). There were 37 men and 23 women whose ages ranged from 17 to 64 years (mean, 36.87 years). All procedures were performed by two radiologists with less than 1 year of experience in arthrographic procedures. The accuracy of the two injection techniques was compared. Extraarticular contrast material leak was graded according to the MR arthrography findings. The number of injection attempts and the effect of contrast material extravasation rate on diagnostic quality were recorded.

Results: There were no significant differences between US-guided punctures with and without an axillary bolster in regard to pain (p = 0.39). Injections with an axillary bolster had a higher likelihood of success on the first attempt (p = 0.0031). Complete extravasation in the US-guided posterior approach technique without an axillary bolster was significantly higher than the US-guided posterior injection technique with an axillary bolster (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion: Although there is no significant difference in pain scores for both techniques, complete contrast material extravasation is seen at a higher rate in the US-guided posterior approach injection technique without the use of an axillary bolster compared to the technique used.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
248
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Ultrasound (JCU) is an international journal dedicated to the worldwide dissemination of scientific information on diagnostic and therapeutic applications of medical sonography. The scope of the journal includes--but is not limited to--the following areas: sonography of the gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary tract, vascular system, nervous system, head and neck, chest, breast, musculoskeletal system, and other superficial structures; Doppler applications; obstetric and pediatric applications; and interventional sonography. Studies comparing sonography with other imaging modalities are encouraged, as are studies evaluating the economic impact of sonography. Also within the journal''s scope are innovations and improvements in instrumentation and examination techniques and the use of contrast agents. JCU publishes original research articles, case reports, pictorial essays, technical notes, and letters to the editor. The journal is also dedicated to being an educational resource for its readers, through the publication of review articles and various scientific contributions from members of the editorial board and other world-renowned experts in sonography.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信