AJR Custom publishing of AJR articles and ARRS Cat. Course
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Winquist, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Harley, J.
Right arrow Articles by Winquist, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 138, Issue 3, 413-417
Copyright © 1982 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

CT of acetabular fractures: comparison with conventional radiography

JD Harley, LA Mack, and RA Winquist

Computed tomography (CT) and plain radiography of the pelvis were compared in 26 adult patients in whom acetabular fractures or posterior femoral head dislocations were demonstrated or suspected on initial radiographs. The detection of abnormalities of the sacrum, sacroiliac joint, iliac wing, acetabular roof, joint space, anterior pelvic column, posterior pelvic column, posterior acetabular lip, pubic rami, and quadrilateral surface of the ilium by the two methods was compared. The ability of the two techniques to establish the stable fragment was also examined. Three independent readings of each examination for each pelvic region were tabulated, and sensitivity and specificity values were calculated. There was no significant difference between plain radiography and computed tomography in detection of fractures of the iliac wing, anterior pelvic column, posterior pelvic column, and the pubic rami, with high sensitivity and specificity for both examinations. CT was more sensitive than plain radiography in detecting fractures involving the sacrum, quadrilateral surface, acetabular roof, and posterior acetabular lip. In addition, abnormalities of the hip joint space, principally loose bone fragments, were detected more often by CT. Sensitivity of both examinations for abnormalities of the sacroiliac joint was relatively poor, but examinations were highly specific. Determination of the stable fracture fragment(s) was readily accomplished by CT scanning in all 26 patients; in five patients incorrect determinations were made with conventional radiographs alone.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
K. Ohashi, G. Y. El-Khoury, K. W. Abu-Zahra, and K. S. Berbaum
Interobserver Agreement for Letournel Acetabular Fracture Classification with Multidetector CT: Are Standard Judet Radiographs Necessary?
Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 386 - 391.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
R Kickuth, G Hartung, U Laufer, C Gruening, C Stueckle, D Liermann, and J Kirchner
Stereoscopic 3D CT vs standard 3D CT in the classification of acetabular fractures: an experimental study
Br. J. Radiol., May 31, 2002; 75(893): 422 - 427.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1982 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.