Ultrasound evaluations and guided procedures of the painful joint arthroplasty.

The purpose of this article is to describe the use of ultrasound for the diagnosis and treatment of painful joint arthroplasty. Ultrasound plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of the painful joint arthroplasty, especially given its unique dynamic capabilities, convenience, and high resolution. Ultrasound guidance is also instrumental for procedures in both diagnosing and in select cases, treating the painful joint arthroplasty. Topics to be discussed in this article include trends in arthroplasty placement, benefits of the use of ultrasound overall, and ultrasound evaluation of periprosthetic joint infections. We will also review the sonographic findings with dissociated/displaced components and adverse reaction to metallic debris including metallosis, trunnionosis, and metal-on-metal pseudotumors. Additionally, we will discuss ultrasound evaluation of tendon pathologies with arthroplasties, including dynamic maneuvers to evaluate for tendon impingement/snapping. Finally, we will cover ultrasound-guided joint arthroplasty injection indications and precautions. KEY POINTS: • Ultrasound is preferred over MRI in patients with joint arthroplasty and plays a crucial role in diagnosis, especially given its unique dynamic capabilities, convenience and high resolution. • It is especially beneficial for US-guided aspiration in periprosthetic joint infections; effectively used to evaluate periprosthetic fluid collections, facilitating differentiation between abscesses and aseptic collections, and tracking sinus tracts. • Recently, the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections has shifted focus to biomarkers in the periprosthetic fluid, specifically α-defensin, which has a high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing infection. • Cutibacterium acnes is a major pathogen responsible for shoulder arthroplasty infections, often presenting with normal laboratory values and since slow growing, must be kept for a minimum of 14 days.

Categorization and characterization of lesions of the orbital apex.

INTRODUCTION: The apex of the orbit is formed by the union of the lesser and greater wings of the sphenoid bone and acts as an osseous tunnel for numerous neurovascular structures entering the orbit from the cranial vault. Lesions of the orbital apex are clinically important as they can have an adverse effect on vision. A broad range of lesions can occur here, and our purpose is to organize the pathologic processes which occur in the orbital apex into logical imaging differentials, establish an organized approach to image analysis, and present examples of representative lesions. METHODS: We review the anatomy of the orbital apex and categorize and describe the pathologic entities that are encountered most frequently in this anatomically compact region and identify imaging patterns that can help to narrow the differential diagnosis. RESULTS: Categories of orbital apex lesions include neoplasms, inflammatory processes, infections, lesions causing extrinsic compression, and vascular lesions. This categorization provides an organized framework to facilitate a reasonable differential diagnosis. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging are the modalities of choice to evaluate and characterize orbital apex lesions, and imaging examples utilizing these modalities will be presented. CONCLUSION: The orbital apex is a clinically important anatomical region and hosts diverse pathologic processes. An awareness of common imaging patterns can help to generate a focused differential diagnosis. A systematic categorical approach can be of help to radiologists attempting to accurately characterize lesions in this area.