AJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Griffith, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Chan, K. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Griffith, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Chan, K. M.
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?

CT Compared with Arthroscopy in Quantifying Glenoid Bone Loss

James F. Griffith1, Patrick S. H. Yung2, Gregory E. Antonio1, Polly H. Tsang1, Anil T. Ahuja1 and Kai Ming Chan2

1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Organ Imaging, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, 30-32 Ngan Shing St., Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
2 Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.


Figure 1
View larger version (104K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 1A —45-year-old man with recurrent shoulder dislocation. Calibration probe inserted through posterior arthroscopic portal with tip of probe at posterior margin (A), bare spot (B), and anterior margin (C). Distance from posterior margin to bare spot is longer than from bare spot to anterior margin, thus indicating glenoid bone loss.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (117K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 1B —45-year-old man with recurrent shoulder dislocation. Calibration probe inserted through posterior arthroscopic portal with tip of probe at posterior margin (A), bare spot (B), and anterior margin (C). Distance from posterior margin to bare spot is longer than from bare spot to anterior margin, thus indicating glenoid bone loss.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (113K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 1C —45-year-old man with recurrent shoulder dislocation. Calibration probe inserted through posterior arthroscopic portal with tip of probe at posterior margin (A), bare spot (B), and anterior margin (C). Distance from posterior margin to bare spot is longer than from bare spot to anterior margin, thus indicating glenoid bone loss.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 2A —Photographs of arthroscopic probe. Overall view of calibrated arthroscopic probe (A) and localized view of calibrated tip (B). Tip is marked at intervals of 1 mm.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 2B —Photographs of arthroscopic probe. Overall view of calibrated arthroscopic probe (A) and localized view of calibrated tip (B). Tip is marked at intervals of 1 mm.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (151K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 3A —CT images reconstructed en face to glenoid fossae in 37-year-old man with recurrent unilateral dislocation. Normal side shows normal curved anterior glenoid rim (arrows). Glenoid width (solid line), measured at right angles to long axis of glenoid (dashed line), measures 28.4 mm.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (145K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 3B —CT images reconstructed en face to glenoid fossae in 37-year-old man with recurrent unilateral dislocation. On dislocated side, there is anterior straight line to anterior glenoid rim (arrows). Glenoid width (solid line), measured at right angles to long axis of glenoid (dashed line), measures 24.7 mm. Glenoid bone loss is difference in glenoid width (3.7 mm) divided by normal width (28.4 mm) x 100 = 13% glenoid bone loss.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 4 —Graph shows correlation between glenoid bone loss measured at arthroscopy and at CT examination. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was 0.79, with 95% CI of 0.659–0.877.

 

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?



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.