Imaging of the foot and ankle: Summary and update

Current Opinion in Orthopaedics

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 54-59

  Flemming, Donald J ^a,b   Murphey, Mark D ^b,c,d   McCarthy, Kevin ^a  

^a WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIFORMED SERVICES UNIVERSITY OF THE HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^c ARMED FORCES INSTITUTE OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Foot and ankle; Magnetic resonance angiography; Magnetic resonance imaging; Nuclear medicine

Indexed keywords

ANKLE RADIOGRAPHY; ARTHRITIS; ARTHROGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONGENITAL DISORDER; DIABETIC FOOT; DIABETIC NEUROPATHY; FOOT RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MUSCLE ATROPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; OSTEOMYELITIS; PHOTON; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TIBIA FRACTURE; WEIGHT BEARING;

EID: 15444366641     PISSN: 10419918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.bco.0000154176.29585.8b     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Haapamaki W, Kiuru MJ, Koskinen SK. Ankle and foot injuries: analysis of MDCT findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:615-622. Study that shows CT is superior to radiography for the detection and characterization of midfoot fractures.
2. Brown SD, Kasser JR, Zurakowski D, Jaramillo D. Analysis of 51 tibial triplane fractures using CT with multiplanar reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1489-1495. Review of impact of reconstructed CT images on the assessment of tibial triplane fractures.
3. Schmid MR, Pfirrmann CWA, Hodler J, et al. Cartilage lesions in the ankle joint: comparison of MR arthrography and CT arthrography. Skeletal Radiol 2003; 32:259-265. Retrospective study that suggests that CT arthrography may be equivalent and even superior to MR for evaluation of posttraumatic ankle cartilage defects.
4. Choplin RH, Buckwalter KA, Rydberg J, Farber JM. CT with 3D rendering of the tendons of the foot and ankle: technique, normal anatomy, and disease. Radiographics 2004; 24:343-356. Description of technique and utility of CT imaging of tendons.
5. Gold GE, Suh B, Sawyer-Glover A, Beaulieu C. Musculoskeletal MRI at 3.0T: initial clinical experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1479-1486. Nice overview of MR imaging of musculoskeletal structures in 3.0-T systems.
6. Gold GE, Han E, Stainsby J, et al. Musculoskeletal MRI at 3.0T: relaxation times and image contrast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:343-351. Overview of differences between tissue contrast in 1.5- and 3.0-T systems.
7. Premkumar A, Perry MB, Dwyer AB, et al. Sonography and MR imaging of posterior tibial tendinopathy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178:223-232.
8. Robson MD, Benjamin N, Gishen P, Bydder GM. Magnetic resonance imaging of the Achilles tendon using ultrashort TE (UTE) pulse sequences. Clin Radiol 2004; 59:727-735. Nice explanation of new MR sequence that improves evaluation of tendon.
9. Andersen H, Gjerstad MD, Jakobsen J. Atrophy of foot muscles. A measure of diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes Care 2004; 27:2392-2385. Paper that describes how to measure volume of foot muscle atrophy.
10. Bus SA, Maas M, Cavanaugh PR, et al. Plantar fat-pad displacement in neuropathic diabetic patients with toe deformity. Diabetes Care 2004; 27:2376-2381. Study describes MR appearance of distally displaced plantar fat pads in diabetic neuropathy.
11. Anderson SE, Weber M, Steinbach LS, Ballmer FT. Shoe rim and shoe buckle pseudotumor in elite and professional figure skaters and snowboarders: MR imaging findings. Skeletal Radiol 2004; 33:325-329. Description of MR appearance of painful subcutaneous callus in elite athletes.
12. Chomel S, Douek P, Moulin P, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the foot: anatomy and clinical applications in patients with diabetes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1435-1442. Pictorial review of MRA of the foot in normal and diabetic patients with description of MR technique.
13. Schweitzer ME, Morrison WB. MR imaging of the diabetic foot. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42:61-71. Review article discussing the imaging of osteomyelitis and neuropathic osteoarthropathy in the diabetic foot.
14. Von Rothenberg T, Schaffstein J, Judwig J, et al. Imaging osteomyelitis with Tc-99m-labeled antigranulocyte antibody Fab' fragments. Clin Nucl Med 2003; 28:643-647.
15. Roivanen A, Parkkola R, Yli-Kerttula T, et al. Use of positron emission tomography with methyl-11C-choline and 2-18F-fluro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of inflammatory proliferation of synovium. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48:3077-3084.
16. Amiot L, Poulin F. Computed tomography-based navigation for hip, knee, and spine surgery. Clin Orthop 2004; 421:77-86. Description of computer-aided orthopedic surgery using CT data.
17. Kahler DM. Image guidance. Fluoroscopic navigation. Clin Orthop 2004; 421:70-76. Overview of advantages and disadvantages of fluoroscopic computer-aided orthopedic surgery.
18. Langlotz F. Potential pitfalls of computer aided orthopedic surgery. Injury 2004; 35:S17-S23. Overview of pitfalls in computer-aided orthopedic surgery.