Publications by authors named "Daniel E Weiland"

Hip pain can be caused by multiple pathologies. Injuries to the acetabular labrum are the most common pathologic findings identified at the time of hip arthroscopy. Five causes of labral tears have been identified; these include trauma, femoroacetabular impingement, capsular laxity, dysplasia, and degeneration.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

In this study, we compared the accuracy of radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in assessing periacetabular osteolytic lesions. Using a previously published cadaver model, we created 87 lesions in pelves implanted with total hip replacement components. The sensitivity for detecting lesions was 51.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Periprosthetic osteolysis is a well recognized complication of total hip arthroplasty that leads to implant failure. The ability to accurately assess and visualize the position and volume of periacetabular bone defects is paramount for clinical observation and medical treatment, as well as pre-operative planning of revision surgery. We have developed a modified magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol that is useful in detection and quantification of periacetabular bone loss.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Patients with rotator cuff tears have varying degrees of symptom expression. Our purpose was to evaluate the differential firing patterns of the rotator cuff, deltoid, and scapular stabilizer muscle groups in normal control subjects and in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic 2-tendon rotator cuff tears. Eighteen subjects were evaluated: six normal subjects and twelve with 2-tendon cuff tears (six asymptomatic and six symptomatic).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The poor results of surgical treatment of chronic instability after total hip arthroplasty (THA) led to the development of a constrained acetabular component. In this study, 87 constrained THAs implanted for recurrent instability were reviewed retrospectively. Eighty-five hips were available for follow-up evaluation, with an average follow-up period of 58 months.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF