ABSTRACT
18 perilunate dislocations and fracture-dislocations were treated at the Trauma Center of the Vienna General Hospital during the period from 1992 to 1995. Only five cases were treated without surgery. 15 of these 18 patients returned for follow-up after an average of 16 months. In ten cases good results were achieved. Radiologically, eight patients were classified as good. Overall better results were seen after surgical treatment.
Subject(s)
Fractures, Bone/surgery , Joint Dislocations/surgery , Lunate Bone/injuries , Wrist Injuries/surgery , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Fracture Fixation, Internal , Fracture Healing/physiology , Fractures, Bone/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Joint Dislocations/diagnostic imaging , Lunate Bone/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/diagnostic imaging , Radiography , Wrist Injuries/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the usefulness of a low field MRI system (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica) for the evaluation of meniscal tears with regard to anatomic site, and to compare the results with findings from a high field unit (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen). MATERIAL AND METHODS: MRI was performed in 25 patients in a low field (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica), and a high field (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen) MRI unit. The images were analyzed for the presence or absence of meniscal tears and the confidence of decision making. Results were further analyzed for the number of identical and unidentical findings on both imaging modalities. In seven patients, arthroscopy was performed and the findings compared with the results from MR imaging. Statistical analysis was performed by chi 2-test, Wilcoxon test and Friedman analysis. RESULTS: Qualitative evaluation of the level of confidence in decision making was significantly superior on high field strength images. When comparing the evaluations from both image modalities in 21 of 25 patients (84%), the diagnosis concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears was identical. CONCLUSION: Although low field MR imaging might offer diagnostic potential concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears, the level of confidence in decision making is significantly superior with high field strength imaging, probably reflecting the higher conspicuity of lesions from high field strength units.
Subject(s)
Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Tibial Meniscus Injuries , Adult , Arthroscopy , Decision Making , Female , Humans , MaleABSTRACT
Anatomical dedicated low-field-strength MR imaging (non-whole-body-systems) has been developed for examinations of the peripheral joints. It has several advantages compared to high-field-strength MR imaging (whole-body-systems). The dimensions are small, the noise is not as bad as in whole body systems and people do not suffer of claustrophobic attacks. However, our results of a prospective blinded study in 56 patients with three different kinds of peripheral joint injuries demonstrated that the 0.2 T dedicated system showed a significant lower rate of diagnostic accuracy compared to middle and high-field-strength MR imaging and scored with obvious lower image quality ratings.