Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prospective evaluation of two different injection techniques for MR arthrography of the hip

  • Musculoskeletal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate prospectively the technical feasibility and discomfort of two different injection techniques for MR arthrography of the hip. Sixty-one consecutive patients undergoing MR arthrography of the hip (68 hips) were randomly injected either at the femoral head (36 hips) or the femoral neck (32 hips). The patients rated discomfort during and 0–72 h after arthrography using a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0=“did not feel anything”, 100=“unbearable”). The volume injected, the distance between the needle tract and the neurovascular bundle, the duration of the procedure and the extra-articular contrast leakage were measured. No significant differences were found for the volume injected, the distance between the needle tract and the neurovascular bundle, or the procedure duration. Volume of extra-articular contrast leakage was statistically significantly different (head 1±2 cm3, neck 3±5 cm3, P=0.024). The VAS score for needle advancement was significantly different (head 25±20, neck 19±23, P=0.031). No significant differences were found for the VAS score regarding delayed discomfort. Before the examination the arthrography-related discomfort was overestimated by 74% (50/68), correctly anticipated by 22% (15/68) and underestimated by 4% (3/68) of the patients. MR-related discomfort was overestimated by 32% (22/68), correctly anticipated by 57% (39/68) and underestimated by 10% (7/68) of the patients. Both hip puncture techniques were well tolerated. The neck injection technique produced less discomfort and was associated with greater extra-articular contrast leakage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kenin A, Levine J (1952) A technique for arthrography of the hip. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 68:107–111

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Straw R, Chell J, Dhar S (2002) Adduction sign in pediatric hip arthrography. J Pediatr Orthop 22:350–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Strife JL, Towbin R, Crawford A (1984) Hip arthrography in infants and children: the inferomedial approach. Radiology 152:536

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schwartz AM, Goldberg MJ (1979) The medial adductor approach to arthrography of the hip in children. Radiology 132:483

    Google Scholar 

  5. Leopold SS, Battista V, Oliverio JA (2001) Safety and efficacy of intraarticular hip injection using anatomic landmarks. Clin Orthop 192–197

  6. Hendrix RW, Anderson TM (1981) Arthrographic and radiologic evaluation of prosthetic joints. Radiol Clin North Am 19:349–364

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bellaiche L, Wybier M, Champsaur P (1997) Arthrography of the hip. Ann Radiol (Paris) 40:11–21

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kilcoyne RF, Kaplan P (1992) The lateral approach for hip arthrography. Skeletal Radiol 21:239–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Aliabadi P, Baker ND, Jaramillo D (1998) Hip arthrography, aspiration, block, and bursography. Radiol Clin North Am 36:673–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Salvati EA, Freiberger RH, Wilson PD Jr (1971) Arthrography for complications of total hip replacement. A review of thirty-one arthrograms. J Bone Joint Surg Am 53:701–709

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ozonoff MB (1973) Controlled arthrography of the hip: a technique of fluoroscopic monitoring and recording. Clin Orthop 93:260–264

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Miller TT (2000) MR arthrography of the shoulder and hip after fluoroscopic landmarking. Skeletal Radiol 29:81–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Goldman AB (1980) Arthrography of the hip joint. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 13:111–171

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Spector GW (1973) Joint distention arthrography. Alternate method of treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip. Mo Med 70:605–607 passim

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Brandser EA, El-Khoury GY, FitzRandolph RL (1997) Modified technique for fluid aspiration from the hip in patients with prosthetic hips. Radiology 204:580–582

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Razzano CD, Nelson CL, Wilde AH (1974) Arthrography of the adult hip. Clin Orthop 99:86–94

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dobson MM (1950) A further anatomical check on the accuracy of intra-articular hip injections in relation to the therapy of coxarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 9:237–240

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M, Leunig M, Notzli H, Siebenrock KA (2003) Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop 417:112–120

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ganz R, Gill TJ, Gautier E, Ganz K, Krugel N, Berlemann U (2001) Surgical dislocation of the adult hip: a technique with full access to the femoral head and acetabulum without the risk of avascular necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83:1119–1124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Elentuck D, Palmer WE (2004) Direct magnetic resonance arthrography. Eur Radiol 14:1956–1967

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hewitt JD, Glisson RR, Guilak F, Vail TP (2002) The mechanical properties of the human hip capsule ligaments. J Arthroplasty 17:82–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Binkert CA, Zanetti M, Hodler J (2001) Patients’ assessment of discomfort during MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology 221:775–778

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Robbins MI, Anzilotti KF Jr, Katz LD, Lange RC (2000) Patient perception of magnetic resonance arthrography. Skeletal Radiol 29:265–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland

    Sylvain R. Duc, Juerg Hodler, Marius R. Schmid, Marco Zanetti, Bernard Mengiardi & Christian W. A. Pfirrmann

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland

    Claudio Dora

Authors
  1. Sylvain R. Duc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juerg Hodler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marius R. Schmid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marco Zanetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bernard Mengiardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Claudio Dora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christian W. A. Pfirrmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sylvain R. Duc.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duc, S.R., Hodler, J., Schmid, M.R. et al. Prospective evaluation of two different injection techniques for MR arthrography of the hip. Eur Radiol 16, 473–478 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2865-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2865-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation