A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Fluoroscopic and magnetic resonance cross-sectional imaging assessments of radial and ulnar torsion profiles in volunteers. | LitMetric

Purpose: Planning an osteotomy to correct rotational malunions of the forearm is difficult because the uninvolved side is the only available reference to assess radial and ulnar torsions. This study was designed to compare the reliability of 2 methods for the determination of the torsion profile of both forearm bones and to assess side differences further in volunteers.

Methods: Fluoroscopy in combination with goniometry and magnetic resonance (MR) cross-sectional imaging were used to determine torsion profiles of the radius and the ulna in 24 asymptomatic volunteers. Interrater and interside reliabilities were assessed.

Results: For the radius, interclass correlation coefficients were less than 0.65 with fluoroscopy and greater than 0.80 with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). For the ulna, both methods had an interclass correlation coefficient of greater than 0.90. Maximum side-to-side differences assessed with fluoroscopy and MRI were 25 degrees and 34.5 degrees for the radius and 20 degrees and 32 degrees for the ulna, respectively. There were no statistical differences between sides using both methods for both forearm bones.

Conclusions: Fluoroscopy coupled with goniometry is a valuable method for assessing the torsion profile of the ulna. MR cross-sectional imaging is better to assess the torsion profile of the radius; however, a side difference in torsion profile of up to 35 degrees for the radius and of up to 20 degrees for the ulna should be considered physiologic. Hence, only side differences greater than these limits may serve as an indication for an axial osteotomy in the clinical setting.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2007.02.001DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

torsion profile
16
magnetic resonance
12
cross-sectional imaging
12
resonance cross-sectional
8
radial ulnar
8
torsion profiles
8
side differences
8
interclass correlation
8
degrees radius
8
radius degrees
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!