Shoulder and Knee Arthroscopy Access Point: Prospective Comparison of Sonographic and Palpatory Detection - Which Method is Better for Novices?

Purpose Arthroscopy is one of the most common interventions in orthopedics. Hence it is important to train users early in order to ensure the safest possible identification of access portals (AP). This prospective study aimed to compare a palpatory (PalpMethod) with a sonographic (SonoMethod) method for AP location in the shoulder and knee joints. Materials and Methods The study included trainee doctors (n=68) attending workshops (lasting approx. 90 minutes). In these workshops a teaching video initially demonstrated the PalpMethod and SonoMethod of AP identification. An experienced operator first marked the access portals on the test subject with a UV pen (determined ideal point [DIP]). Adhesive film was then affixed to the puncture regions. Subsequently participants marked on shoulders and knees first the point determined by palpation, then the point determined by sonography. Analysis involved DIP visualization with a UV lamp and employed a coordinate system around the central DIP. In addition, participants completed an evaluation before and after the workshop. Results The analysis included 324 measurements (n=163 shoulders and n= 161 knees). The majority of participants had not previously attended any courses on manual examination (87.9%) or musculoskeletal ultrasound (93.9%). Overall, the markings participants made on the shoulder using the SonoMethod were significantly closer to the DIP than those made by the PalpMethod (Palp 18.8mm ± 14.5mm vs. Sono 11.2mm ± 7.2mm; p<0.001). On the knee, however, the markings made by the PalpMethod were significantly closer to the DIP overall (Palp 8.0mm ± 3.2mm vs. Sono 12.8mm ± 5.2mm; p<0.001). Conclusion The results show that the SonoMethod produces more accurate markings on the shoulder, while the PalpMethod is superior for the knee.

Comparison between Ultrasound-Guided and Palpatory Localization of the Dorsal Joint Space of the Shoulder Joint.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Arthroscopy ranks among the frequently performed interventions in orthopedics. The aim of this study was to compare the palpation technique with the ultrasound technique for locating the dorsal glenohumeral joint space (JS) in shoulder joint punctures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Participants inexperienced in ultrasound examinations were included. Palpatory and ultrasound finding of the joint space by the participants was performed according to current recommendations and was initially demonstrated by an instructional video. The ideal point (IP) was marked under ultrasound visualization by an experienced ultrasound examinator and shoulder-elbow surgeon. Furthermore, a corridor for a safe puncture was defined. The palpatorily determined point (pdP) was marked by the participants and evaluated by means of a coordinate system. The evaluation of the sonographically determined point (sdP) was performed similarly to that of the palpatory procedure. RESULTS: Fifty-four participants were included in the study, and the mean length of work experience was 6.3 years. On average, participants had performed 16.5 punctures of the shoulder joint and 6.8 arthroscopies of the shoulder joint. The mean experience in performing sonographic examinations of the shoulder was 27.6 examinations. A total of 100 shoulder joints were examined (54 left, 46 right shoulders). The mean deviation from the ideal point (IP) for the palpatory approach was 17.1 mm with a maximum deviation of 59.5 mm; for the sonographic technique, the mean deviation was 10.3 mm (max. 30.2 mm). Overall, 22% of pdPs were within the defined corridor, while 42% of sdPs were within the target corridor. The average difference between palpatory and sonographic approaches was 9.0 mm in favor of the sonographic technique (max. 46.5 mm). A significantly greater deviation (p < 0.001) from the IP was observed with the palpatory approach than with the sonographic approach. CONCLUSION: Based on the results, the authors recommend ultrasound imaging of the shoulder joint as well as ultrasound-assisted punctures, especially for inexperienced users. Furthermore, training in ultrasound-assisted interventions should be implemented in future training curricula.

The Modified Ultrasound-Assisted Method: A Study of the Correlation between Magnetic Resonance Imaging and the Ultrasound-Assisted Evaluation of the Critical Shoulder Angle.

BACKGROUND: An increased or decreased critical shoulder angle (CSA) is a known risk factor for osteoarthritis, lesions, and re-ruptures in the rotator cuff. A CSA greater than 35° correlates with degenerative rotator cuff tears, while a CSA of less than 30° correlates with osteoarthritis in the glenohumeral joint. The diagnostic gold standard for its determination is X-ray or MRI. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this research was to assess the viability of utilizing sonography imaging as a diagnostic tool to determine the modified critical shoulder angle (mCSA). This study aimed to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of sonographic techniques in accurately diagnosing CSA compared to MRI. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A cohort study was carried out (level of evidence 3). The CSA (MRI) and the mCSA (ultrasound) were assessed retrospectively by two independent board-certified investigators in 109 patients with shoulder pain by MRI and musculoskeletal sonography. The CSA in the MRI dataset was determined using routine protocols and then compared to the values assessed using the modified sonography-assisted method (mCSA). Both results were analyzed with linear regression to determine a possible correlation. All investigations were performed by a DEGUM (German Society for Medical Ultrasound)-certified specialist in musculoskeletal sonography. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were included in this study, namely 40 female patients and 72 male patients with a mean age of 54.7 years at the time of the investigation. The mean CSA in MRI was 31.5° ± 3.899, and the mCSA in sonography was 30.1° ± 4.753. The inter- and intraobserver reliability for the CSA was factual with values of 0.993 and 0.967. The inter- and intraobserver reliability for mCSA was factual as well, with values of 0.989 and 0.948. The ANOVA analysis did not reveal a significant difference between the CSA and the mCSA values, and linear regression determined the R2 value to be 0.358 with p < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosing the mCSA using sonography is a safe and valid method. No statistically significant differences between the results in MRI and sonography could be seen. Although this is a retrospective, single-center study including only Caucasian mid-Europeans, and with the known limitations of ultrasound imaging, it nevertheless shows that sonography can be used as a simple, cheap, and fast technique to assess a modified CSA, which shows very good correlation with the standard CSA without losing the diagnostic quality.

Association of Chondrolabral Lesions with Ultrasound-Guided Detection of Pathological Head-Neck Contour.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate whether the asphericity of the neck-head junction of the femur confirmed via ultrasound is associated with further pathology due to femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI). METHODOLOGY: After a clinical examination with positive FAI tests, an ultrasound examination of the hip was performed. In the case of asphericity, a quantitative ultrasound-assisted assessment of the hip was performed, followed by contrast-enhanced arthro-MRI with the question of cartilage or labral damage. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We included 51 patients with a mean age of 35.25. According to the examination algorithm, asphericity was present in all patients via ultrasonography. The average anterior alpha angle (AAA) determined in ultrasonography was 43.49°. The average AAA on the arthro-MRI was 44.19°. The mean anterior head neck offset (AHNO) in ultrasound was 5.27 mm, and in arthro-MRI, it was 5.36 mm. Arthro-MRI confirmed a bump in 47 patients and a talization disorder in 4 patients. In 49 patients, a labral lesion was found, with one being a re-rupture. Furthermore, in one patient, labral degeneration was identified. Cartilage damage to the hip joint was found in 25 patients. Two patients had neither labral nor cartilage damage in the arthro-MRI. In our study, sonographically confirmed asphericity of the head-neck junction was found in 49 cases, which was associated with further pathology and, according to the current doctrine, was attributable to the FAI and required surgical intervention. This study shows that the detection of a pathologic head and neck contour via ultrasound in combination with positive clinical signs, as present in FAI, is associated with chondrolabral lesions detected via arthro-MRI in 96.1% of cases.

Digital Transformation in Musculoskeletal Ultrasound: Acceptability of Blended Learning.

BACKGROUND: ultrasound diagnostics have a broad spectrum of applications, including among diseases of the musculoskeletal system. Accordingly, it is important for the users to have a well-founded and up-to-date education in this dynamic examination method. The right balance between online and in-class teaching still needs to be explored in this context. Certifying institutions are currently testing digitally transformed teaching concepts to provide more evidence. METHODS: this study compared two musculoskeletal ultrasound blended learning models. Model A was more traditional, with a focus on in-person teaching, while Model B was more digitally oriented with compulsory webinar. Both used e-learning for preparation. Participants completed evaluations using a seven-point Likert scale, later converted to a 0-1 scale. Digital teaching media (e-learning) were used for preparation in both courses. RESULTS: the analysis included n = 41 evaluations for Model A and n = 30 for Model B. Model B received a better overall assessment (median: 0.73 vs. 0.69, p = 0.05). Model B also excelled in "course preparation" (p = 0.02), "webinar quality" (p = 0.04), and "course concept" (p = 0.04). The "gain of competence" (p = 0.82), "learning materials" (p = 0.30), and "tutor quality" (p = 0.28) showed no significant differences. CONCLUSION: participants favorably assessed blended learning in ultrasound teaching. Certifying institutions should consider accrediting models that combine digital methods (e.g., internet lectures/webinars) and materials (e.g., e-learning) with hands-on ultrasound training. Further research is needed to validate these subjective findings for a stronger evidential basis.

Sonography-Based Determination of Hip Joint Anterior Alpha-Angle: A Reliable and Reproducible Method.

PURPOSE: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a known risk factor for hip osteoarthritis. The gold standard for diagnostics is X-ray and MRI. The accuracy of hip joint alpha angle measurements obtained using sonography is equal to measurements in MRI for patients with cam impingement of the hip joint. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with hip pain and MRI and sonography were evaluated between January 2015 and December 2019 in a single center. Musculoskeletal sonography was performed according to the DEGUM guidelines by ultrasound-certified specialists. Measurements were repeated three times by two independent investigators. RESULTS: 285 patients were screened, and 110 patients (49 females, 61 males) met the inclusion criteria. The mean age at time of investigation of 54 left and 56 right hip joints was 54.2 years. 1320 measurements were performed. The mean alpha angle was 50.7° in MRI and 50.4° in sonography with a mean difference of 0.28° (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Determining hip alpha angle using sonography is a safe and reproducible method. No statistically significant differences between results in MRI and sonography could be seen. Although this is a retrospective, single-center study including only Caucasian mid-Europeans and with the known limitations of ultrasound imaging, it nevertheless shows that sonography can be used as a simple, cheap, and fast technique to assess the hip alpha angle without losing diagnostic quality.