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

Comparison of ultrasound-guided versus blind glenohumeral injections: a cadaveric study. | LitMetric

Background: Intra-articular glenohumeral (GH) injections are important for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. It has been suggested that ultrasound guided injections are more accurate than blind or freehand injections. This study assessed the accuracy of ultrasound-guided GH injections compared with freehand injections in fresh cadavers.

Methods: The study used 80 shoulder specimens from fresh cadavers. Ultrasound guidance was used to inject radiopaque contrast in 40 shoulders, and freehand technique was used in the remaining 40. All injections were performed by 2 surgeons (A and B) through a posterior approach. After the injections, radiographs were obtained of the specimens to assess the accuracy of the injections.

Results: Sixty-six of 80 (82.5%) injections were accurately administered into the GH joint. Ultrasound-guided injections were accurate in 37 of 40 specimens (92.5%) compared with freehand injections, which were accurate in only 29 of 40 specimens (72.5%; P = .02). Both surgeons independently had higher accuracy using ultrasound-guidance compared with the freehand technique (surgeon A: 90% vs 65%, P = 0.058; surgeon B: 95% vs 80%, P = 0.15). The average time for injections was 52 seconds by the freehand technique and 166 seconds using ultrasound guidance (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: The data from this cadaveric study suggest that ultrasound-guided injections are more accurate at reaching the GH joint than freehand injections. The ultrasound-guided injections took substantially longer to administer. Once familiar with the technique, surgeons can expect improved accuracy and efficacy of GH joint injections using ultrasound guidance in the clinical setting.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.11.026DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

injections
16
injections accurate
16
freehand injections
16
ultrasound-guided injections
16
compared freehand
12
ultrasound guidance
12
freehand technique
12
glenohumeral injections
8
cadaveric study
8
accurate specimens
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!