Stroud C C, Marks R M
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Foot Ankle Clin. 2000 Mar;5(1):119-33.
A review of the literature reveals that all studies have been performed retrospectively. These studies have included limited numbers of low-grade lesions and no prospective, randomized, comparison studies have been performed to suggest the superiority of CT scanning over MR imaging. The following conclusions, however, can be made. Plain radiographs are useful in the initial evaluation of patients with acute or chronic complaints of ankle pain and swelling. These initial studies, however, may not identify all osteochondral lesions of the talus, particularly lower grade lesions. CT scanning can accurately identify and localize a lesion while defining its extent. It has been suggested that CT scanning can be used to assess whether bony healing has occurred at follow-up. MR imaging can also precisely identify, localize, and define an OLT with the advantage of assessing the integrity of the overlying cartilage. It can detect lower grade lesions with improved sensitivity and may aid in the differentiation of Stage II and Stage III lesions. Using the preceding observations, the following approach is recommended in the evaluation and work-up of an osteochondral lesion of the talus (Fig. 7). The patient who presents with ankle pain and swelling should have weight-bearing radiographs of the ankle obtained. If these films demonstrate an osteochondral lesion of the talus, staging of the lesion should be performed. In lesions that appear nondisplaced on plain radiography (low grade; stable), MR imaging is recommended so the clinician can evaluate the integrity of the overlying cartilage and assess the true stability of the lesion. In lesions that appear displaced on plain radiography (high grade; unstable), the CT scan is the preferred modality in order to provide accurate assessment of lesion size and location. It should be noted, however, that no study has prospectively [figure: see text] compared the efficacy of these two modalities in the evaluation of osteochondral lesions. If a symptomatic patient presents with negative plain films, then an initial period of immobilization using a cast or boot brace is recommended. This is followed by joint mobilization and range of motion exercises. If the patient remains symptomatic at the 4 to 6 week followup period, then an MR image should be performed. This study provides information regarding soft-tissue impingement, proliferative synovitis, and other bony and soft-tissue pathology. The authors have found that despite the results of bone scintigraphy, an MR image is invariably obtained. Because of this the authors do not recommend bone scintigraphy in the evaluation and diagnosis of OLT.
文献综述显示,所有研究均为回顾性研究。这些研究纳入的低级别病变数量有限,且尚未进行前瞻性、随机对照研究以表明CT扫描优于磁共振成像(MR成像)。然而,可以得出以下结论。X线平片对踝关节急性或慢性疼痛及肿胀患者的初步评估有用。然而,这些初步检查可能无法识别距骨的所有骨软骨损伤,尤其是较低级别的损伤。CT扫描能够准确识别和定位病变,并确定其范围。有人提出,CT扫描可用于评估随访时是否已发生骨愈合。MR成像也能精确识别、定位并确定骨软骨损伤(OLT),其优势在于可评估覆盖软骨的完整性。它能以更高的敏感性检测出较低级别的损伤,并有助于区分II期和III期损伤。基于上述观察结果,在距骨骨软骨损伤的评估和检查中建议采用以下方法(图7)。出现踝关节疼痛和肿胀的患者应拍摄踝关节负重X线片。如果这些片子显示距骨有骨软骨损伤,应对损伤进行分期。对于在X线平片上显示无移位的损伤(低级别;稳定),建议进行MR成像,以便临床医生评估覆盖软骨的完整性并评估损伤的真正稳定性。对于在X线平片上显示有移位的损伤(高级别;不稳定),CT扫描是首选的检查方式,以便准确评估损伤的大小和位置。然而,应该注意的是,尚无研究前瞻性地[图:见正文]比较这两种检查方式在评估骨软骨损伤方面的疗效。如果有症状的患者X线平片结果为阴性,那么建议先用石膏或靴式支具固定一段时间。随后进行关节活动和活动度练习。如果患者在4至6周的随访期仍有症状,那么应进行MR成像检查。这项检查可提供有关软组织撞击、增生性滑膜炎以及其他骨和软组织病变的信息。作者发现,尽管有骨闪烁显像的结果,但最终还是会进行MR成像检查。因此,作者不建议在OLT的评估和诊断中使用骨闪烁显像。