+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Evaluation of needle positioning during blind intra-articular hip injections for osteoarthritis: fluoroscopy versus arthrography

Evaluation of needle positioning during blind intra-articular hip injections for osteoarthritis: fluoroscopy versus arthrography

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 90(12): 2112-2115

Diraçoğlu D, Alptekin K, Dikici F, Balci HI, Ozçakar L, Aksoy C. Evaluation of needle positioning during blind intra-articular hip injections for osteoarthritis: fluoroscopy versus arthrography. To evaluate needle positioning during blind/anatomically referenced hip joint injections for osteoarthritis (OA). Experimental clinical study. Operating theater of a university hospital. Patients (N=16) (10 women, 6 men), who were diagnosed as having OA according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria and whose radiologic grades were II or III according to Kellgren-Lawrence. Three bilateral and 13 unilateral hip injections were performed (3 times at 1-week intervals). After it was presumed blindly that the needle was within the joint, the location of the needle was checked with backflow technique and fluoroscopy. Entrance to the joint cavity was also ensured by reconfirmation with contrast medium, and the procedure was then terminated with hyaluronic acid injection. Assessment of blind needle placement into the hip joint by using backflow technique, fluoroscopic images, and contrast enhancement. The location of the needle was fluoroscopically confirmed to be at the proper position in 38 (66.7%) of the 57 blind interventions. Furthermore, in 29 (76.3%) of those 38 interventions, localization of the intra-articular needle could be confirmed by intra-articular contrast uptake. Overall, 29 of 57 (50.9%) blind interventions exhibited intra-articular contrast enhancement. Backflow was not observed in 23 (79.3%) of these 29 interventions. Five (17.9%) of 28 interventions with no contrast uptake showed backflow. In light of our results, we suggest that blind injection of the osteoarthritic hip joint can be inaccurate even with careful technique. Further, the backflow method does not appear to be reliable, and guidance during the injection seems to be necessary.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 053076282

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 19969177

DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.08.137

Related references

Air arthrography to confirm intra-articular positioning for hip injections. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 96(5): 389, 2014

Comparative, double-blind, controlled study of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (Hyalubrix) injections versus local anesthetic in osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Research and Therapy 11(6): R183, 2009

A double-blind trial of intra-articular hyaluronic acid versus intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism 35(9 Suppl. ): S132, 1992

Ab09543d echografic findings of U.S. guided hip intra-articular jaluronic acid injections in osteoarthritis: 3d versus 2d evaluation and response to treatment. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 71(Suppl 3): 693.5-693, 2013

Can we also treat hip osteoarthritis with intra-articular injections of hialuronic acid? Clinical results of 2 year experience using ultrasound guided intra-articular injections. Gazzetta Medica Italiana Archivio per le Scienze Mediche 162(2-3): 75-82, Giugno, 2003

AB0969Accuracy of blind intra-articular injections in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. An ultrasonography controlled study. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 71(Suppl 3): 694.6-694, 2013

Comparison of intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip in comparison with intra-articular injections of bupivacaine. Design of a prospective, randomized, controlled study with blinding of the patients and outcome assessors. Bmc Musculoskeletal Disorders 11: 264, 2010

Intra-articular hyaluronan injections for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 19(3): 265-270, 2001

Economic Impact of Ketorolac vs Corticosteroid Intra-Articular Knee Injections for Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Prospective Study. Journal of Arthroplasty 31(9 Suppl): 293-297, 2016

Ultrasound versus palpation guidance for intra-articular injections in patients with degenerative osteoarthritis of the elbow. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound 41(8): 479-485, 2013

Comparison of hyaluronic acid and PRP intra-articular injection with combined intra-articular and intraosseous PRP injections to treat patients with knee osteoarthritis. Clinical Rheumatology 37(5): 1341-1350, 2018

Intra-articular injections of sodium hyaluronate (Hyalgan®) in osteoarthritis of the knee. a randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial in the Asian population. Bmc Musculoskeletal Disorders 12: 221, 2011

Effectiveness of intra-articular injections of sodium bicarbonate and calcium gluconate in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized double-blind clinical trial. Bmc Musculoskeletal Disorders 16: 114, 2015

Efficacy of Ultrasound-guided Intra-articular Injections of Platelet-rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Hip Osteoarthritis. Orthopedics 36(12): E1501-E1508, 2013

Hyaluronic acid versus saline intra-articular injections for amelioration of chronic knee osteoarthritis: A canine model. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 34(10): 1772-1779, 2016