Duc Sylvain R, Hodler Juerg, Schmid Marius R, Zanetti Marco, Mengiardi Bernard, Dora Claudio, Pfirrmann Christian W A
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Eur Radiol. 2006 Feb;16(2):473-8. doi: 10.1007/s00330-005-2865-z. Epub 2005 Aug 16.
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 cm(3), neck 3+/-5 cm(3), 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.
本研究的目的是前瞻性评估两种不同注射技术用于髋关节磁共振关节造影的技术可行性和不适程度。61例连续接受髋关节磁共振关节造影的患者(68个髋关节)被随机分为在股骨头(36个髋关节)或股骨颈(32个髋关节)注射。患者使用视觉模拟量表(VAS,0 =“无任何感觉”,100 =“无法忍受”)对关节造影期间及之后0 - 72小时的不适进行评分。测量注射量、针道与神经血管束之间的距离、操作持续时间以及关节外造影剂渗漏情况。在注射量、针道与神经血管束之间的距离或操作持续时间方面未发现显著差异。关节外造影剂渗漏量在统计学上有显著差异(股骨头1±2 cm³,股骨颈3±5 cm³,P = 0.024)。进针时的VAS评分有显著差异(股骨头25±20,股骨颈19±23,P = 0.031)。关于延迟不适的VAS评分未发现显著差异。在检查前,68例患者中有74%(50/68)高估了与关节造影相关的不适,22%(15/68)正确预期,4%(3/68)低估。68例患者中有32%(22/68)高估了与磁共振相关的不适,57%(39/68)正确预期,10%(7/68)低估。两种髋关节穿刺技术耐受性均良好。股骨颈注射技术引起的不适较少,但关节外造影剂渗漏较多。