Orthopedic hardware complications diagnosed with multi-detector row CT

Radiology

Volumn 237, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 570-577

  Ohashi, Kenjirou ^a   El Khoury, Georges Y ^a   Bennett, D Lee ^a   Restrepo, José M ^a   Berbaum, Kevin S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETABULOPLASTY; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANKLE FRACTURE; ARM INJURY; ARTHRODESIS; BONE PLATE; BONE SCREW; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELBOW FRACTURE; FEMALE; FEMUR FRACTURE; FOLLOW UP; FRACTURE EXTERNAL FIXATION; FRACTURE NONUNION; HUMAN; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; OPEN REDUCTION; ORTHOPEDIC EQUIPMENT; ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY; OSTEOSYNTHESIS; OSTEOTOMY; PELVIS FRACTURE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE INFECTION; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS LOOSENING; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCHOOL CHILD; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINE FRACTURE; SPINE STABILIZATION; STANDARD; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERTEBRA DISLOCATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHILD; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORTHOPEDIC FIXATION DEVICES; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 27144525852     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2372041681     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Young SW, Muller HH, Marshall WH. Computed tomography: beam hardening and environmental density artifact. Radiology 1983;148:279-283.
2. Golimbu C, Firooznia H, Rafii M, Engler G, Delman A. Computed tomography of thoracic and lumbar spine fractures that have been treated with Harrington instrumentation. Radiology 1984;151:731-733.
3. Rydberg J, Buckwalter KA, Caldemeyer KS, et al. Multisection CT: scanning techniques and clinical applications. RadioGraphics 2000;20:1787-1806.
4. Fishman EK, Magid D, Robertson DD, Brooker AF, Weiss P, Siegelman SS. Metallic hip implants: CT with multiplanar reconstruction. Radiology 1986;160:675-681.
5. Citrin CM. Multi-planar reconstruction as a method of eliminating streak artifact in computed tomographic images. Comput Radiol 1982;6:377-378.
6. Calhoun PS, Kuszyk BS, Heath DG, Carley JC, Fishman EK. Three-dimensional volume rendering of spiral CT data: theory and method. RadioGraphics 1999;19:745-764.
7. Palestro CJ, Swyer AJ, Kim CK, Goldsmith SJ. Infected knee prosthesis: diagnosis with In-111 leukocyte, Tc-99m sulfur colloid, and Tc-99m MDP imaging. Radiology 1991;179:645-648.
8. Palestro CJ, Kim CK, Swyer AJ, Capozzi JD, Solomon RW, Goldsmith SJ. Total-hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic indium-111-labeled leukocyte activity and complementary technetium-99m-sulfur colloid imaging in suspected infection. J Nucl Med 1990;31:1950-1955.
9. Stumpe KD, Notzli HP, Zanetti M, et al. FDG PET for differentiation of infection and aseptic loosening in total hip replacements: comparison with conventional radiography and three-phase bone scintigraphy. Radiology 2004;231:333-341.
10. White LM, Kim JK, Mehta M, et al. Complications of total hip arthroplasty: MR imaging-initial experience. Radiology 2000;215:254-262.
11. Sugimoto H, Hirose I, Miyaoka E, et al. Low-field-strength MR imaging of failed hip arthroplasty: association of femoral periprosthetic signal intensity with radiographic, surgical, and pathologic findings. Radiology 2003;229:718-723.
12. Pandey R, Drakoulakis E, Athanasou NA. An assessment of the histological criteria used to diagnose infection in hip revision arthroplasty tissues. J Clin Pathol 1999;52:118-123.
13. Rockette HE, Gur D, Metz CE. The use of continuous and discrete confidence judgments in receiver operating characteristic studies of diagnostic imaging techniques. Invest Radiol 1992;27:169-172.
14. King JL, Britton CA, Gur D, Rockette HE, Davis PL. On the validity of the continuous and discrete confidence rating scales in receiver operating characteristic studies. Invest Radiol 1993;28:962-963.
15. Dorfman DD, Alf E Jr. Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of signal detection theory and determination of confidence intervals: rating method data. J Math Psych 1969;6:487-496.
16. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Abu-Dagga HI, Schartz KM. RSCORE 4.66. ftp://perception.radiology.uiowa.edu. Accessed November 12, 2004.
17. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol 1992;27:723-731.
18. Schartz KM, Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Dorfman DD. MRMC 1.84 BETA 4. Subroutine: analysis of variance with normalized pseudovalue assuming fixed readers. ftp://perception.radiology.uiowa.edu. Accessed November 12, 2004.
19. Haramati N, Staron RB, Mazel-Sperling K, et al. CT scans through metal scanning technique versus hardware composition. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1994;18:429-434.
20. Wang G, Frei T, Vannier MW. Fast iterative algorithm for metal artifact reduction in x-ray CT. Acad Radiol 2000;7:607-614.
21. Robertson DD, Weiss PJ, Fishman EK, Magid D, Walker PS. Evaluation of CT techniques for reducing artifacts in the presence of metallic orthopedic implants. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1988;12:236-241.
22. Wilting JE, Timmer J. Artefacts in spiral-CT images and their relation to pitch and subject morphology. Eur Radiol 1999;9:316-322.
23. Vannier MW. Current technologies and future directions of musculoskeletal imaging with multi-detector row CT. In: Buckwalter KA, Kransdorf MJ, eds. Syllabus: musculoskeletal imaging-exploring new limits. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2003; 127-132.
24. Farber JM. CT arthrography and postoperative musculoskeletal imaging with current multichannel CT system. In: Buckwalter KA, Kransdorf MJ, eds. Syllabus: musculoskeletal imaging-exploring new limits. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2003; 119-126.
25. Link TM, Berning W, Scherf S, et al. CT of metal implants: reduction of artifacts using an extended CT scale technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000;24:165-172.
26. Munk PL, Vellet AD, Levin MF, Romano CC, Lentle B, Bourne RB. Imaging after arthroplasty. Can Assoc Radiol J 1994;45:6-15.
27. Eustace S, Shah B, Mason M. Imaging orthopedic hardware with an emphasis on hip prostheses. Orthop Clin North Am 1998;29:67-84.
28. Vyskocil P, Gerber C, Bamert P. Radiolucent lines and component stability in knee arthroplasty: standard versus fluoroscopically-assisted radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999;81:24-26.
29. Moed BR, Carr SE, Gruson KI, Watson JT, Craig JG. Computed tomographic assessment of fractures of the posterior wall of the acetabulum after operative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85-A:512-522.
30. Ebraheim NA, Mekhail AO, Darwich M. Open reduction and internal fixation with bone grafting of clavicular nonunion. J Trauma 1997;42:701-704.
31. Slone RM, MacMillan M, Montgomery WJ. Spinal fixation. III. Complications of spinal instrumentation. RadioGraphics 1993;13:797-816.