Tension Pneumothorax After Ultrasound-Guided Interscalene Block and Shoulder Arthroscopy

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:30
Display Headline
Tension Pneumothorax After Ultrasound-Guided Interscalene Block and Shoulder Arthroscopy

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia is commonly used for arthroscopic and open procedures of the shoulder. This regional anesthetic targets the trunks of the brachial plexus and anesthetizes the area about the shoulder and proximal arm. Its use may obviate the need for concomitant general anesthesia, potentially reducing the use of postoperative intravenous and oral pain medication. Furthermore, patients often bypass the acute postoperative anesthesia care unit and proceed directly to the ambulatory unit, permitting earlier hospital discharge. Previous reports in the literature have demonstrated higher rates of neurologic, cardiac, and pulmonary complications from this procedure; in particular, the incidence of pneumothorax was reported as high as 3%.1 Techniques to localize the nerves, such as electrical nerve stimulation and, more recently, ultrasound guidance, have reduced these complication rates.2,3 Successful administration of the block has been shown to result in satisfactory postoperative pain relief.2 However, ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve blocks remain operator-dependent and complications may still occur.

We report a case of tension pneumothorax after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and subacromial decompression with an ultrasound-guided interscalene block. Immediate recognition and treatment of this complication resulted in a good clinical outcome. The patient provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report. 

Case Report

A 56-year-old woman presented with 3 months of right shoulder pain after a fall. Examination was pertinent for weakness in forward elevation and positive rotator cuff impingement signs. She remained symptomatic despite a course of nonsurgical management that included cortisone injections and physical therapy. Magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder showed a full-thickness supraspinatus tear with minimal fatty atrophy. After a discussion of her treatment options, she elected to undergo an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with subacromial decompression. An evaluation by her internist revealed no pertinent medical history apart from obesity (body mass index, 36). Specifically, there was no reported history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma. She denied any prior cigarette smoking.

The patient was evaluated by the regional anesthesia team and was classified as a class 2 airway. An interscalene brachial plexus block was performed using a 2-inch, 22-gauge needle inserted into the interscalene groove. Using an out-of-plane technique under direct ultrasound guidance, 30 mL of 0.52% ropivacaine was injected. The block was considered successful, and no complications, such as resistance, paresthesias, pain, or blood on aspiration, were noted during injection. The patient had no complaints of chest pain or shortness of breath immediately afterward, and all vital signs were stable throughout the procedure.

The patient was brought to the operating room and placed in the beach-chair position. Induction for general anesthesia was started 15 minutes after the regional anesthetic, with 2 intubation attempts necessary because of poor airway visualization. After placement of the endotracheal tube, breath sounds were noted to be equal bilaterally. The arthroscopic procedure consisted of double-row rotator cuff repair, subacromial decompression, and débridement of the glenohumeral joint for synovitis, using standard arthroscopic portals. There were no difficulties with trocar placement, and bleeding was minimal throughout the case. The total surgical time was 150 minutes and a pump pressure of 30 mm Hg was maintained during the arthroscopy.

Within the first 60 minutes of the start of the arthroscopic procedure, the patient was noted to be intermittently hypotensive with mean arterial pressure (MAP) ranging from the 30s to 130s mm Hg and pulse in the 70 to 80 beats/min range. FiO2 in the 85% to 95% range was maintained throughout the procedure. During that time, 50 μg phenylephrine was administered on 4 separate occasions to maintain her blood pressure. The labile blood pressure was attributed by the anesthesiologist to the beach-chair position. During an attempted extubation upon conclusion of the surgery, the patient became hypotensive with MAP that ranged from the 40s to 60s mm Hg and tachycardic to 90 beats/min. The oxygen saturation was in the low 90s and tidal volume was poor. Absent lung sounds were noted on the right chest. An urgent portable chest radiograph showed a large right-sided tension pneumothorax with mediastinal shift (Figure 1). After an immediate general surgery consultation, a chest tube was placed in the operating room. The patient’s vital signs improved and a repeat chest radiograph revealed successful re-expansion of the lung (Figure 2). She was transferred to the acute postoperative anesthesia care unit and extubated in the intensive care unit later that day.

 

The patient’s chest tube was removed 2 days later and she was discharged home on hospital day 5 with a completely resolved pneumothorax. She was seen 1 week later in the office for a postoperative visit and reported feeling well without chest pain or shortness of breath.

 

 

Discussion

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia was first described by Winnie4 in 1970. This block targets the trunks of the brachial plexus, which are enclosed in a fascial sheath between the anterior and middle scalene muscles. In this region lie several structures at risk: the phrenic nerve superficially and inferiorly; the carotid sheath located superficially and medially; the subclavian artery parallel to the trunks; and the cupula of the lung that lies deep and inferior to the anterior scalene muscle. Recognized complications of the block include vocal hoarseness, Horner syndrome, and hemidiaphragmatic paresis caused by the temporary blockade of the ipsilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve, stellate ganglion, and phrenic nerve, in that order.5 Use of the interscalene block has been associated with minimal risk for pneumothorax, because the needle entry point is superior and directed away from the lung pleura.6 This is in contrast to the more inferiorly placed supraclavicular block, located in closer proximity to the lung cupula.5

Two different approaches are commonly used during ultrasound-guided nerve blocks. The in-plane approach generates a long-axis view of the needle by advancing the needle parallel with the long axis of the ultrasound probe. While this allows direct visualization of the needle tip, it requires deeper needle insertion from lateral to medial, causing puncture of the middle scalene muscle that may increase patient discomfort and risk nerve injury within the muscle.7 The out-of-plane approach used on our patient involves needle insertion parallel to the brachial plexus, but along the short axis of the ultrasound probe. Although this permits the operator to assess the periphery of the nerve, it may lead to poor needle-tip visualization during the procedure. As a result, operators often use a combination of tissue disturbance and “hydrolocation,” in which fluid is injected to indicate the needle-tip location.8,9

Tension pneumothorax represents the accumulation of air in the pleural space that leads to impaired pulmonary and cardiac function. It is often caused by disruption or puncture of the parietal or visceral pleura, creating a connection between the alveoli and pleural cavity. The gradual buildup of air in the pleural cavity results in increased intrapleural pressure, which compresses and ultimately collapses the ipsilateral lung. Venous compression restricts blood return to the heart and reduces cardiac output. Clinical manifestations include dyspnea, hypoxemia, tachycardia, and hypotension.10 Multiple techniques were developed to better localize the brachial plexus while reducing injury to nearby structures, including the lung. These include eliciting needle paresthesias, electrical nerve stimulation, and ultrasound guidance. While nerve stimulation was once the gold standard for brachial plexus localization, ultrasound guidance has gained in popularity because of its noninvasive nature and dynamic capability to identify nerves and surrounding structures.11 Perlas and colleagues12 determined the sensitivity of needle paresthesias and nerve stimulation to be 38% and 75%, respectively, in cases in which plexus localization had been confirmed by ultrasound.

Several studies have reported on the efficacy of interscalene nerve block with either nerve stimulation or ultrasound guidance in the setting of shoulder surgery.2,3 Bishop and colleagues3 reviewed 547 patients who underwent interscalene regional anesthesia with nerve stimulation for both arthroscopic and open-shoulder procedures. They reported a 97% success rate and 12 (2.3%) minor complications, including sensory neuropathy and complex regional pain syndrome. There were no cases of pneumothorax, cardiac events, or other major complications.3 In a prospective study of 1319 patients, Singh and colleagues2 reported a 99.6% success rate using ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks for their shoulder surgeries. A total of 38 adverse events (2.88%) were identified: 14 transient neurologic events, including ear numbness, digital numbness, and brachial plexitis; 1 case of intraoperative bradycardia, and 2 cancellations after the block for chest pain and flank pain, which yielded negative cardiac workups. Other complications included postoperative emergency room visits and hospital admissions for reasons unrelated to the block.2 Interscalene regional anesthesia, therefore, provides effective anesthesia for shoulder surgery with low complication rates.

Pneumothorax after ultrasound-guided interscalene block has rarely been reported.13,14 In a review of 144 ultrasound-guided indwelling interscalene catheter placements, a 98% successful block rate with a single complication of small pneumothorax after total shoulder arthroplasty was reported.13 Mandim and colleagues14 reported a case of pneumothorax in a smoker who underwent an ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block prior to open reduction and internal fixation of an ulnar fracture. While the patient was asymptomatic and vital signs remained stable during the procedure, the patient complained postoperatively of chest pain with hypoxia, tachycardia, and hypotension. A chest radiograph confirmed an ipsilateral pneumothorax, and the patient was treated successfully with chest-tube placement. The authors attributed this complication to a higher pleural dome resulting from a hyperinflated lung caused by chronic smoking. Our patient reported no history of smoking and her preoperative chest radiograph had no evidence of lung disease.

 

 

In contrast, several cases of pneumothorax after shoulder surgery have been reported in the absence of nerve block. Oldman and Peng1 reported a 41-year-old nonsmoker who underwent arthroscopic labral repair and subacromial decompression. The preoperative nerve block was cancelled, and the patient received general endotracheal anesthesia alone. Fifty minutes after the case, the patient developed chest pain and hypoxia. A chest radiograph showed a small pneumothorax that was managed conservatively. The pneumothorax was attributed to spontaneous rupture of a preexisting lung bulla, suggesting that blocks are not always the cause of this complication. Furthermore, Dietzel and Ciullo15 reported 4 cases of spontaneous pneumothorax within 24 hours of uncomplicated arthroscopic shoulder procedures under general anesthesia in the lateral decubitus position. The patient ages ranged from 22 to 38 years, and medical histories were all significant for preexisting lung disease, remote history of pneumonia, and heavy smoking. Three of the patients experienced symptoms at home the day after surgery. The authors concluded that these cases were likely caused by rupture of blebs or bullae from underlying lung disease; these ruptured blebs or bullae are difficult to detect and usually located in the upper lung. The pressure gradient from the positive pressure of anesthesia and the ipsilateral upper lung is thought to be highest in the lateral decubitus position, increasing their chance of rupture.15

Finally, Lee and colleagues16 described 3 patients aged 40 to 45 years who underwent uncomplicated subacromial decompression in the beach-chair position under general anesthesia. Significant shoulder, neck, and axillary swelling were noted after surgery, and a chest radiograph showed tension pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, and pneumomediastinum. The authors speculated that pressure in the subacromial space may become negative relative to atmospheric pressure when the shaver and suction are running, drawing in air through other portals. When the suction is discontinued, fluid infusion may push air into the surrounding tissue, leading to subcutaneous emphysema, which may spread to the mediastinum.16 

Conclusion 

Ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve blocks have successfully provided anesthesia for shoulder surgeries with low complication rates. Although the incidence of pneumothorax has decreased significantly with ultrasound guidance, the success of this procedure is highly operator-dependent. We present the case of an otherwise healthy patient without known pulmonary disease who developed a tension pneumothorax after the administration of ultrasound-guided regional and general anesthesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists must remain vigilant for pneumothorax during the perioperative period after shoulder surgery performed under interscalene regional aesthesia, particularly in the setting of hypotension, hypoxia, and/or tachycardia. Risk factors, such as history of smoking and preexisting lung disease, may predispose patients to the development of pneumothorax. Timely recognition and placement of a chest tube result in satisfactory clinical outcomes.

References

 

1.    Oldman M, Peng Pi P. Pneumothorax after shoulder arthroscopy: don’t blame it on regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(4):382-383.

2.    Singh A, Kelly C, O’Brien T, Wilson J, Warner JJ. Ultrasound-guided interscalene block anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy: a prospective study of 1319 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(22):2040-2046.

3.    Bishop JY, Sprague M, Gelber J, et al. Interscalene regional anesthesia for shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):974-979.

4.    Winnie AP. Interscalene brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg. 1970;49(3):455-466.

5.    Mian A, Chaudhry I, Huang R, Rizk E, Tubbs RS, Loukas M. Brachial plexus anesthesia: a review of the relevant anatomy, complications, and anatomical variations. Clin Anat. 2014;27(2):210-221.

6.    Brown AR, Weiss R, Greenberg C, Flatow EL, Bigliani LU. Interscalene block for shoulder arthroscopy: comparison with general anesthesia. Arthroscopy. 1993;9(3):295-300.

7.    Marhofer P, Harrop-Griffiths W, Willschke H, Kirchmair L. Fifteen years of ultrasound guidance in regional anaesthesia: Part 2 - recent developments in block techniques. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104(6):673-683.

8.    Sites BD, Spence BC, Gallagher J, et al. Regional anesthesia meets ultrasound: a specialty in transition. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008;52(4):456-466.

9.    Ilfeld BM, Fredrickson MJ, Mariano ER. Ultrasound-guided perineural catheter insertion: three approaches but few illuminating data. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35(2):123-126.

10.  Choi WI. Pneumothorax. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2014;76(3):99-104.

11.  Klaastad O, Sauter AR, Dodgson MS. Brachial plexus block with or without ultrasound guidance. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(5):655-660.

12.  Perlas A, Niazi A, McCartney C, Chan V, Xu D, Abbas S. The sensitivity of motor response to nerve stimulation and paresthesia for nerve localization as evaluated by ultrasound. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2006;31(5):445-450.

13.  Bryan NA, Swenson JD, Greis PE, Burks RT. Indwelling interscalene catheter use in an outpatient setting for shoulder surgery: technique, efficacy, and complications. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(4):388-395.

14.  Mandim BL, Alves RR, Almeida R, Pontes JP, Arantes LJ, Morais FP. Pneumothorax post brachial plexus block guided by ultrasound: a case report. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2012;62(5):741-747.

15.  Dietzel DP, Ciullo JV. Spontaneous pneumothorax after shoulder arthroscopy: a report of four cases. Arthroscopy. 1996;12(1):99-102.

16.  Lee HC, Dewan N, Crosby L. Subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, and potentially life-threatening tension pneumothorax. Pulmonary complications from arthroscopic shoulder decompression. Chest. 1992;101(5):1265-1267.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Robert Li, MD, Ajay Lall, MD, MS, Everett Lai, BS, and Konrad I. Gruson, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E407-E410
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, tension, pneumothorax, ultrasound, interscalene block, shoulder arthroscopy, arthroscopy, shoulder, anesthesia, injury, rotator cuff repair, rotator cuff, li, lall, lai, gruson
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Robert Li, MD, Ajay Lall, MD, MS, Everett Lai, BS, and Konrad I. Gruson, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Robert Li, MD, Ajay Lall, MD, MS, Everett Lai, BS, and Konrad I. Gruson, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia is commonly used for arthroscopic and open procedures of the shoulder. This regional anesthetic targets the trunks of the brachial plexus and anesthetizes the area about the shoulder and proximal arm. Its use may obviate the need for concomitant general anesthesia, potentially reducing the use of postoperative intravenous and oral pain medication. Furthermore, patients often bypass the acute postoperative anesthesia care unit and proceed directly to the ambulatory unit, permitting earlier hospital discharge. Previous reports in the literature have demonstrated higher rates of neurologic, cardiac, and pulmonary complications from this procedure; in particular, the incidence of pneumothorax was reported as high as 3%.1 Techniques to localize the nerves, such as electrical nerve stimulation and, more recently, ultrasound guidance, have reduced these complication rates.2,3 Successful administration of the block has been shown to result in satisfactory postoperative pain relief.2 However, ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve blocks remain operator-dependent and complications may still occur.

We report a case of tension pneumothorax after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and subacromial decompression with an ultrasound-guided interscalene block. Immediate recognition and treatment of this complication resulted in a good clinical outcome. The patient provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report. 

Case Report

A 56-year-old woman presented with 3 months of right shoulder pain after a fall. Examination was pertinent for weakness in forward elevation and positive rotator cuff impingement signs. She remained symptomatic despite a course of nonsurgical management that included cortisone injections and physical therapy. Magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder showed a full-thickness supraspinatus tear with minimal fatty atrophy. After a discussion of her treatment options, she elected to undergo an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with subacromial decompression. An evaluation by her internist revealed no pertinent medical history apart from obesity (body mass index, 36). Specifically, there was no reported history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma. She denied any prior cigarette smoking.

The patient was evaluated by the regional anesthesia team and was classified as a class 2 airway. An interscalene brachial plexus block was performed using a 2-inch, 22-gauge needle inserted into the interscalene groove. Using an out-of-plane technique under direct ultrasound guidance, 30 mL of 0.52% ropivacaine was injected. The block was considered successful, and no complications, such as resistance, paresthesias, pain, or blood on aspiration, were noted during injection. The patient had no complaints of chest pain or shortness of breath immediately afterward, and all vital signs were stable throughout the procedure.

The patient was brought to the operating room and placed in the beach-chair position. Induction for general anesthesia was started 15 minutes after the regional anesthetic, with 2 intubation attempts necessary because of poor airway visualization. After placement of the endotracheal tube, breath sounds were noted to be equal bilaterally. The arthroscopic procedure consisted of double-row rotator cuff repair, subacromial decompression, and débridement of the glenohumeral joint for synovitis, using standard arthroscopic portals. There were no difficulties with trocar placement, and bleeding was minimal throughout the case. The total surgical time was 150 minutes and a pump pressure of 30 mm Hg was maintained during the arthroscopy.

Within the first 60 minutes of the start of the arthroscopic procedure, the patient was noted to be intermittently hypotensive with mean arterial pressure (MAP) ranging from the 30s to 130s mm Hg and pulse in the 70 to 80 beats/min range. FiO2 in the 85% to 95% range was maintained throughout the procedure. During that time, 50 μg phenylephrine was administered on 4 separate occasions to maintain her blood pressure. The labile blood pressure was attributed by the anesthesiologist to the beach-chair position. During an attempted extubation upon conclusion of the surgery, the patient became hypotensive with MAP that ranged from the 40s to 60s mm Hg and tachycardic to 90 beats/min. The oxygen saturation was in the low 90s and tidal volume was poor. Absent lung sounds were noted on the right chest. An urgent portable chest radiograph showed a large right-sided tension pneumothorax with mediastinal shift (Figure 1). After an immediate general surgery consultation, a chest tube was placed in the operating room. The patient’s vital signs improved and a repeat chest radiograph revealed successful re-expansion of the lung (Figure 2). She was transferred to the acute postoperative anesthesia care unit and extubated in the intensive care unit later that day.

 

The patient’s chest tube was removed 2 days later and she was discharged home on hospital day 5 with a completely resolved pneumothorax. She was seen 1 week later in the office for a postoperative visit and reported feeling well without chest pain or shortness of breath.

 

 

Discussion

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia was first described by Winnie4 in 1970. This block targets the trunks of the brachial plexus, which are enclosed in a fascial sheath between the anterior and middle scalene muscles. In this region lie several structures at risk: the phrenic nerve superficially and inferiorly; the carotid sheath located superficially and medially; the subclavian artery parallel to the trunks; and the cupula of the lung that lies deep and inferior to the anterior scalene muscle. Recognized complications of the block include vocal hoarseness, Horner syndrome, and hemidiaphragmatic paresis caused by the temporary blockade of the ipsilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve, stellate ganglion, and phrenic nerve, in that order.5 Use of the interscalene block has been associated with minimal risk for pneumothorax, because the needle entry point is superior and directed away from the lung pleura.6 This is in contrast to the more inferiorly placed supraclavicular block, located in closer proximity to the lung cupula.5

Two different approaches are commonly used during ultrasound-guided nerve blocks. The in-plane approach generates a long-axis view of the needle by advancing the needle parallel with the long axis of the ultrasound probe. While this allows direct visualization of the needle tip, it requires deeper needle insertion from lateral to medial, causing puncture of the middle scalene muscle that may increase patient discomfort and risk nerve injury within the muscle.7 The out-of-plane approach used on our patient involves needle insertion parallel to the brachial plexus, but along the short axis of the ultrasound probe. Although this permits the operator to assess the periphery of the nerve, it may lead to poor needle-tip visualization during the procedure. As a result, operators often use a combination of tissue disturbance and “hydrolocation,” in which fluid is injected to indicate the needle-tip location.8,9

Tension pneumothorax represents the accumulation of air in the pleural space that leads to impaired pulmonary and cardiac function. It is often caused by disruption or puncture of the parietal or visceral pleura, creating a connection between the alveoli and pleural cavity. The gradual buildup of air in the pleural cavity results in increased intrapleural pressure, which compresses and ultimately collapses the ipsilateral lung. Venous compression restricts blood return to the heart and reduces cardiac output. Clinical manifestations include dyspnea, hypoxemia, tachycardia, and hypotension.10 Multiple techniques were developed to better localize the brachial plexus while reducing injury to nearby structures, including the lung. These include eliciting needle paresthesias, electrical nerve stimulation, and ultrasound guidance. While nerve stimulation was once the gold standard for brachial plexus localization, ultrasound guidance has gained in popularity because of its noninvasive nature and dynamic capability to identify nerves and surrounding structures.11 Perlas and colleagues12 determined the sensitivity of needle paresthesias and nerve stimulation to be 38% and 75%, respectively, in cases in which plexus localization had been confirmed by ultrasound.

Several studies have reported on the efficacy of interscalene nerve block with either nerve stimulation or ultrasound guidance in the setting of shoulder surgery.2,3 Bishop and colleagues3 reviewed 547 patients who underwent interscalene regional anesthesia with nerve stimulation for both arthroscopic and open-shoulder procedures. They reported a 97% success rate and 12 (2.3%) minor complications, including sensory neuropathy and complex regional pain syndrome. There were no cases of pneumothorax, cardiac events, or other major complications.3 In a prospective study of 1319 patients, Singh and colleagues2 reported a 99.6% success rate using ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks for their shoulder surgeries. A total of 38 adverse events (2.88%) were identified: 14 transient neurologic events, including ear numbness, digital numbness, and brachial plexitis; 1 case of intraoperative bradycardia, and 2 cancellations after the block for chest pain and flank pain, which yielded negative cardiac workups. Other complications included postoperative emergency room visits and hospital admissions for reasons unrelated to the block.2 Interscalene regional anesthesia, therefore, provides effective anesthesia for shoulder surgery with low complication rates.

Pneumothorax after ultrasound-guided interscalene block has rarely been reported.13,14 In a review of 144 ultrasound-guided indwelling interscalene catheter placements, a 98% successful block rate with a single complication of small pneumothorax after total shoulder arthroplasty was reported.13 Mandim and colleagues14 reported a case of pneumothorax in a smoker who underwent an ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block prior to open reduction and internal fixation of an ulnar fracture. While the patient was asymptomatic and vital signs remained stable during the procedure, the patient complained postoperatively of chest pain with hypoxia, tachycardia, and hypotension. A chest radiograph confirmed an ipsilateral pneumothorax, and the patient was treated successfully with chest-tube placement. The authors attributed this complication to a higher pleural dome resulting from a hyperinflated lung caused by chronic smoking. Our patient reported no history of smoking and her preoperative chest radiograph had no evidence of lung disease.

 

 

In contrast, several cases of pneumothorax after shoulder surgery have been reported in the absence of nerve block. Oldman and Peng1 reported a 41-year-old nonsmoker who underwent arthroscopic labral repair and subacromial decompression. The preoperative nerve block was cancelled, and the patient received general endotracheal anesthesia alone. Fifty minutes after the case, the patient developed chest pain and hypoxia. A chest radiograph showed a small pneumothorax that was managed conservatively. The pneumothorax was attributed to spontaneous rupture of a preexisting lung bulla, suggesting that blocks are not always the cause of this complication. Furthermore, Dietzel and Ciullo15 reported 4 cases of spontaneous pneumothorax within 24 hours of uncomplicated arthroscopic shoulder procedures under general anesthesia in the lateral decubitus position. The patient ages ranged from 22 to 38 years, and medical histories were all significant for preexisting lung disease, remote history of pneumonia, and heavy smoking. Three of the patients experienced symptoms at home the day after surgery. The authors concluded that these cases were likely caused by rupture of blebs or bullae from underlying lung disease; these ruptured blebs or bullae are difficult to detect and usually located in the upper lung. The pressure gradient from the positive pressure of anesthesia and the ipsilateral upper lung is thought to be highest in the lateral decubitus position, increasing their chance of rupture.15

Finally, Lee and colleagues16 described 3 patients aged 40 to 45 years who underwent uncomplicated subacromial decompression in the beach-chair position under general anesthesia. Significant shoulder, neck, and axillary swelling were noted after surgery, and a chest radiograph showed tension pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, and pneumomediastinum. The authors speculated that pressure in the subacromial space may become negative relative to atmospheric pressure when the shaver and suction are running, drawing in air through other portals. When the suction is discontinued, fluid infusion may push air into the surrounding tissue, leading to subcutaneous emphysema, which may spread to the mediastinum.16 

Conclusion 

Ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve blocks have successfully provided anesthesia for shoulder surgeries with low complication rates. Although the incidence of pneumothorax has decreased significantly with ultrasound guidance, the success of this procedure is highly operator-dependent. We present the case of an otherwise healthy patient without known pulmonary disease who developed a tension pneumothorax after the administration of ultrasound-guided regional and general anesthesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists must remain vigilant for pneumothorax during the perioperative period after shoulder surgery performed under interscalene regional aesthesia, particularly in the setting of hypotension, hypoxia, and/or tachycardia. Risk factors, such as history of smoking and preexisting lung disease, may predispose patients to the development of pneumothorax. Timely recognition and placement of a chest tube result in satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia is commonly used for arthroscopic and open procedures of the shoulder. This regional anesthetic targets the trunks of the brachial plexus and anesthetizes the area about the shoulder and proximal arm. Its use may obviate the need for concomitant general anesthesia, potentially reducing the use of postoperative intravenous and oral pain medication. Furthermore, patients often bypass the acute postoperative anesthesia care unit and proceed directly to the ambulatory unit, permitting earlier hospital discharge. Previous reports in the literature have demonstrated higher rates of neurologic, cardiac, and pulmonary complications from this procedure; in particular, the incidence of pneumothorax was reported as high as 3%.1 Techniques to localize the nerves, such as electrical nerve stimulation and, more recently, ultrasound guidance, have reduced these complication rates.2,3 Successful administration of the block has been shown to result in satisfactory postoperative pain relief.2 However, ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve blocks remain operator-dependent and complications may still occur.

We report a case of tension pneumothorax after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and subacromial decompression with an ultrasound-guided interscalene block. Immediate recognition and treatment of this complication resulted in a good clinical outcome. The patient provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report. 

Case Report

A 56-year-old woman presented with 3 months of right shoulder pain after a fall. Examination was pertinent for weakness in forward elevation and positive rotator cuff impingement signs. She remained symptomatic despite a course of nonsurgical management that included cortisone injections and physical therapy. Magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder showed a full-thickness supraspinatus tear with minimal fatty atrophy. After a discussion of her treatment options, she elected to undergo an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with subacromial decompression. An evaluation by her internist revealed no pertinent medical history apart from obesity (body mass index, 36). Specifically, there was no reported history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma. She denied any prior cigarette smoking.

The patient was evaluated by the regional anesthesia team and was classified as a class 2 airway. An interscalene brachial plexus block was performed using a 2-inch, 22-gauge needle inserted into the interscalene groove. Using an out-of-plane technique under direct ultrasound guidance, 30 mL of 0.52% ropivacaine was injected. The block was considered successful, and no complications, such as resistance, paresthesias, pain, or blood on aspiration, were noted during injection. The patient had no complaints of chest pain or shortness of breath immediately afterward, and all vital signs were stable throughout the procedure.

The patient was brought to the operating room and placed in the beach-chair position. Induction for general anesthesia was started 15 minutes after the regional anesthetic, with 2 intubation attempts necessary because of poor airway visualization. After placement of the endotracheal tube, breath sounds were noted to be equal bilaterally. The arthroscopic procedure consisted of double-row rotator cuff repair, subacromial decompression, and débridement of the glenohumeral joint for synovitis, using standard arthroscopic portals. There were no difficulties with trocar placement, and bleeding was minimal throughout the case. The total surgical time was 150 minutes and a pump pressure of 30 mm Hg was maintained during the arthroscopy.

Within the first 60 minutes of the start of the arthroscopic procedure, the patient was noted to be intermittently hypotensive with mean arterial pressure (MAP) ranging from the 30s to 130s mm Hg and pulse in the 70 to 80 beats/min range. FiO2 in the 85% to 95% range was maintained throughout the procedure. During that time, 50 μg phenylephrine was administered on 4 separate occasions to maintain her blood pressure. The labile blood pressure was attributed by the anesthesiologist to the beach-chair position. During an attempted extubation upon conclusion of the surgery, the patient became hypotensive with MAP that ranged from the 40s to 60s mm Hg and tachycardic to 90 beats/min. The oxygen saturation was in the low 90s and tidal volume was poor. Absent lung sounds were noted on the right chest. An urgent portable chest radiograph showed a large right-sided tension pneumothorax with mediastinal shift (Figure 1). After an immediate general surgery consultation, a chest tube was placed in the operating room. The patient’s vital signs improved and a repeat chest radiograph revealed successful re-expansion of the lung (Figure 2). She was transferred to the acute postoperative anesthesia care unit and extubated in the intensive care unit later that day.

 

The patient’s chest tube was removed 2 days later and she was discharged home on hospital day 5 with a completely resolved pneumothorax. She was seen 1 week later in the office for a postoperative visit and reported feeling well without chest pain or shortness of breath.

 

 

Discussion

Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia was first described by Winnie4 in 1970. This block targets the trunks of the brachial plexus, which are enclosed in a fascial sheath between the anterior and middle scalene muscles. In this region lie several structures at risk: the phrenic nerve superficially and inferiorly; the carotid sheath located superficially and medially; the subclavian artery parallel to the trunks; and the cupula of the lung that lies deep and inferior to the anterior scalene muscle. Recognized complications of the block include vocal hoarseness, Horner syndrome, and hemidiaphragmatic paresis caused by the temporary blockade of the ipsilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve, stellate ganglion, and phrenic nerve, in that order.5 Use of the interscalene block has been associated with minimal risk for pneumothorax, because the needle entry point is superior and directed away from the lung pleura.6 This is in contrast to the more inferiorly placed supraclavicular block, located in closer proximity to the lung cupula.5

Two different approaches are commonly used during ultrasound-guided nerve blocks. The in-plane approach generates a long-axis view of the needle by advancing the needle parallel with the long axis of the ultrasound probe. While this allows direct visualization of the needle tip, it requires deeper needle insertion from lateral to medial, causing puncture of the middle scalene muscle that may increase patient discomfort and risk nerve injury within the muscle.7 The out-of-plane approach used on our patient involves needle insertion parallel to the brachial plexus, but along the short axis of the ultrasound probe. Although this permits the operator to assess the periphery of the nerve, it may lead to poor needle-tip visualization during the procedure. As a result, operators often use a combination of tissue disturbance and “hydrolocation,” in which fluid is injected to indicate the needle-tip location.8,9

Tension pneumothorax represents the accumulation of air in the pleural space that leads to impaired pulmonary and cardiac function. It is often caused by disruption or puncture of the parietal or visceral pleura, creating a connection between the alveoli and pleural cavity. The gradual buildup of air in the pleural cavity results in increased intrapleural pressure, which compresses and ultimately collapses the ipsilateral lung. Venous compression restricts blood return to the heart and reduces cardiac output. Clinical manifestations include dyspnea, hypoxemia, tachycardia, and hypotension.10 Multiple techniques were developed to better localize the brachial plexus while reducing injury to nearby structures, including the lung. These include eliciting needle paresthesias, electrical nerve stimulation, and ultrasound guidance. While nerve stimulation was once the gold standard for brachial plexus localization, ultrasound guidance has gained in popularity because of its noninvasive nature and dynamic capability to identify nerves and surrounding structures.11 Perlas and colleagues12 determined the sensitivity of needle paresthesias and nerve stimulation to be 38% and 75%, respectively, in cases in which plexus localization had been confirmed by ultrasound.

Several studies have reported on the efficacy of interscalene nerve block with either nerve stimulation or ultrasound guidance in the setting of shoulder surgery.2,3 Bishop and colleagues3 reviewed 547 patients who underwent interscalene regional anesthesia with nerve stimulation for both arthroscopic and open-shoulder procedures. They reported a 97% success rate and 12 (2.3%) minor complications, including sensory neuropathy and complex regional pain syndrome. There were no cases of pneumothorax, cardiac events, or other major complications.3 In a prospective study of 1319 patients, Singh and colleagues2 reported a 99.6% success rate using ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks for their shoulder surgeries. A total of 38 adverse events (2.88%) were identified: 14 transient neurologic events, including ear numbness, digital numbness, and brachial plexitis; 1 case of intraoperative bradycardia, and 2 cancellations after the block for chest pain and flank pain, which yielded negative cardiac workups. Other complications included postoperative emergency room visits and hospital admissions for reasons unrelated to the block.2 Interscalene regional anesthesia, therefore, provides effective anesthesia for shoulder surgery with low complication rates.

Pneumothorax after ultrasound-guided interscalene block has rarely been reported.13,14 In a review of 144 ultrasound-guided indwelling interscalene catheter placements, a 98% successful block rate with a single complication of small pneumothorax after total shoulder arthroplasty was reported.13 Mandim and colleagues14 reported a case of pneumothorax in a smoker who underwent an ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block prior to open reduction and internal fixation of an ulnar fracture. While the patient was asymptomatic and vital signs remained stable during the procedure, the patient complained postoperatively of chest pain with hypoxia, tachycardia, and hypotension. A chest radiograph confirmed an ipsilateral pneumothorax, and the patient was treated successfully with chest-tube placement. The authors attributed this complication to a higher pleural dome resulting from a hyperinflated lung caused by chronic smoking. Our patient reported no history of smoking and her preoperative chest radiograph had no evidence of lung disease.

 

 

In contrast, several cases of pneumothorax after shoulder surgery have been reported in the absence of nerve block. Oldman and Peng1 reported a 41-year-old nonsmoker who underwent arthroscopic labral repair and subacromial decompression. The preoperative nerve block was cancelled, and the patient received general endotracheal anesthesia alone. Fifty minutes after the case, the patient developed chest pain and hypoxia. A chest radiograph showed a small pneumothorax that was managed conservatively. The pneumothorax was attributed to spontaneous rupture of a preexisting lung bulla, suggesting that blocks are not always the cause of this complication. Furthermore, Dietzel and Ciullo15 reported 4 cases of spontaneous pneumothorax within 24 hours of uncomplicated arthroscopic shoulder procedures under general anesthesia in the lateral decubitus position. The patient ages ranged from 22 to 38 years, and medical histories were all significant for preexisting lung disease, remote history of pneumonia, and heavy smoking. Three of the patients experienced symptoms at home the day after surgery. The authors concluded that these cases were likely caused by rupture of blebs or bullae from underlying lung disease; these ruptured blebs or bullae are difficult to detect and usually located in the upper lung. The pressure gradient from the positive pressure of anesthesia and the ipsilateral upper lung is thought to be highest in the lateral decubitus position, increasing their chance of rupture.15

Finally, Lee and colleagues16 described 3 patients aged 40 to 45 years who underwent uncomplicated subacromial decompression in the beach-chair position under general anesthesia. Significant shoulder, neck, and axillary swelling were noted after surgery, and a chest radiograph showed tension pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, and pneumomediastinum. The authors speculated that pressure in the subacromial space may become negative relative to atmospheric pressure when the shaver and suction are running, drawing in air through other portals. When the suction is discontinued, fluid infusion may push air into the surrounding tissue, leading to subcutaneous emphysema, which may spread to the mediastinum.16 

Conclusion 

Ultrasound-guided interscalene nerve blocks have successfully provided anesthesia for shoulder surgeries with low complication rates. Although the incidence of pneumothorax has decreased significantly with ultrasound guidance, the success of this procedure is highly operator-dependent. We present the case of an otherwise healthy patient without known pulmonary disease who developed a tension pneumothorax after the administration of ultrasound-guided regional and general anesthesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists must remain vigilant for pneumothorax during the perioperative period after shoulder surgery performed under interscalene regional aesthesia, particularly in the setting of hypotension, hypoxia, and/or tachycardia. Risk factors, such as history of smoking and preexisting lung disease, may predispose patients to the development of pneumothorax. Timely recognition and placement of a chest tube result in satisfactory clinical outcomes.

References

 

1.    Oldman M, Peng Pi P. Pneumothorax after shoulder arthroscopy: don’t blame it on regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(4):382-383.

2.    Singh A, Kelly C, O’Brien T, Wilson J, Warner JJ. Ultrasound-guided interscalene block anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy: a prospective study of 1319 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(22):2040-2046.

3.    Bishop JY, Sprague M, Gelber J, et al. Interscalene regional anesthesia for shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):974-979.

4.    Winnie AP. Interscalene brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg. 1970;49(3):455-466.

5.    Mian A, Chaudhry I, Huang R, Rizk E, Tubbs RS, Loukas M. Brachial plexus anesthesia: a review of the relevant anatomy, complications, and anatomical variations. Clin Anat. 2014;27(2):210-221.

6.    Brown AR, Weiss R, Greenberg C, Flatow EL, Bigliani LU. Interscalene block for shoulder arthroscopy: comparison with general anesthesia. Arthroscopy. 1993;9(3):295-300.

7.    Marhofer P, Harrop-Griffiths W, Willschke H, Kirchmair L. Fifteen years of ultrasound guidance in regional anaesthesia: Part 2 - recent developments in block techniques. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104(6):673-683.

8.    Sites BD, Spence BC, Gallagher J, et al. Regional anesthesia meets ultrasound: a specialty in transition. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008;52(4):456-466.

9.    Ilfeld BM, Fredrickson MJ, Mariano ER. Ultrasound-guided perineural catheter insertion: three approaches but few illuminating data. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35(2):123-126.

10.  Choi WI. Pneumothorax. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2014;76(3):99-104.

11.  Klaastad O, Sauter AR, Dodgson MS. Brachial plexus block with or without ultrasound guidance. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(5):655-660.

12.  Perlas A, Niazi A, McCartney C, Chan V, Xu D, Abbas S. The sensitivity of motor response to nerve stimulation and paresthesia for nerve localization as evaluated by ultrasound. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2006;31(5):445-450.

13.  Bryan NA, Swenson JD, Greis PE, Burks RT. Indwelling interscalene catheter use in an outpatient setting for shoulder surgery: technique, efficacy, and complications. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(4):388-395.

14.  Mandim BL, Alves RR, Almeida R, Pontes JP, Arantes LJ, Morais FP. Pneumothorax post brachial plexus block guided by ultrasound: a case report. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2012;62(5):741-747.

15.  Dietzel DP, Ciullo JV. Spontaneous pneumothorax after shoulder arthroscopy: a report of four cases. Arthroscopy. 1996;12(1):99-102.

16.  Lee HC, Dewan N, Crosby L. Subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, and potentially life-threatening tension pneumothorax. Pulmonary complications from arthroscopic shoulder decompression. Chest. 1992;101(5):1265-1267.

References

 

1.    Oldman M, Peng Pi P. Pneumothorax after shoulder arthroscopy: don’t blame it on regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(4):382-383.

2.    Singh A, Kelly C, O’Brien T, Wilson J, Warner JJ. Ultrasound-guided interscalene block anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy: a prospective study of 1319 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(22):2040-2046.

3.    Bishop JY, Sprague M, Gelber J, et al. Interscalene regional anesthesia for shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):974-979.

4.    Winnie AP. Interscalene brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg. 1970;49(3):455-466.

5.    Mian A, Chaudhry I, Huang R, Rizk E, Tubbs RS, Loukas M. Brachial plexus anesthesia: a review of the relevant anatomy, complications, and anatomical variations. Clin Anat. 2014;27(2):210-221.

6.    Brown AR, Weiss R, Greenberg C, Flatow EL, Bigliani LU. Interscalene block for shoulder arthroscopy: comparison with general anesthesia. Arthroscopy. 1993;9(3):295-300.

7.    Marhofer P, Harrop-Griffiths W, Willschke H, Kirchmair L. Fifteen years of ultrasound guidance in regional anaesthesia: Part 2 - recent developments in block techniques. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104(6):673-683.

8.    Sites BD, Spence BC, Gallagher J, et al. Regional anesthesia meets ultrasound: a specialty in transition. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2008;52(4):456-466.

9.    Ilfeld BM, Fredrickson MJ, Mariano ER. Ultrasound-guided perineural catheter insertion: three approaches but few illuminating data. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35(2):123-126.

10.  Choi WI. Pneumothorax. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2014;76(3):99-104.

11.  Klaastad O, Sauter AR, Dodgson MS. Brachial plexus block with or without ultrasound guidance. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(5):655-660.

12.  Perlas A, Niazi A, McCartney C, Chan V, Xu D, Abbas S. The sensitivity of motor response to nerve stimulation and paresthesia for nerve localization as evaluated by ultrasound. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2006;31(5):445-450.

13.  Bryan NA, Swenson JD, Greis PE, Burks RT. Indwelling interscalene catheter use in an outpatient setting for shoulder surgery: technique, efficacy, and complications. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(4):388-395.

14.  Mandim BL, Alves RR, Almeida R, Pontes JP, Arantes LJ, Morais FP. Pneumothorax post brachial plexus block guided by ultrasound: a case report. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2012;62(5):741-747.

15.  Dietzel DP, Ciullo JV. Spontaneous pneumothorax after shoulder arthroscopy: a report of four cases. Arthroscopy. 1996;12(1):99-102.

16.  Lee HC, Dewan N, Crosby L. Subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, and potentially life-threatening tension pneumothorax. Pulmonary complications from arthroscopic shoulder decompression. Chest. 1992;101(5):1265-1267.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Page Number
E407-E410
Page Number
E407-E410
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Tension Pneumothorax After Ultrasound-Guided Interscalene Block and Shoulder Arthroscopy
Display Headline
Tension Pneumothorax After Ultrasound-Guided Interscalene Block and Shoulder Arthroscopy
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, tension, pneumothorax, ultrasound, interscalene block, shoulder arthroscopy, arthroscopy, shoulder, anesthesia, injury, rotator cuff repair, rotator cuff, li, lall, lai, gruson
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, tension, pneumothorax, ultrasound, interscalene block, shoulder arthroscopy, arthroscopy, shoulder, anesthesia, injury, rotator cuff repair, rotator cuff, li, lall, lai, gruson
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Characteristics Associated With Active Defects in Juvenile Spondylolysis

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 02/14/2023 - 13:08
Display Headline
Characteristics Associated With Active Defects in Juvenile Spondylolysis

Spondylolysis, a defect in the pars interarticularis, is the single most common identifiable source of persistent low back pain in adolescent athletes.1,2 The diagnosis of spondylolysis is confirmed by radiographic imaging.3 However, there is controversy regarding which imaging modality is preferred—specifically, which to use for first-line advanced imaging after plain radiographs are obtained.3 Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) consistently has been shown to be the most sensitive modality, and it is considered the gold standard.4-7 Patients with a positive SPECT scan are then routinely imaged with computed tomography (CT) for bone detail and staging of the pars defect.8 This imaging or diagnostic sequence yields organ-specific radiation doses (15-30 mSv) as much as 50-fold higher than those of plain radiography.9 Recent epidemiologic studies have shown that this organ dose results in an increased risk of cancer, especially in children.10

Diagnosis is crucial in early-stage lumbar spondylolysis, as osseous healing can occur with conservative treatment.11,12 High signal change (HSC) in the pedicle or pars interarticularis (Figure 1) on fluid-specific (T2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences has been shown to be important in the diagnosis of early spondylolysis and, subsequently, a good predictor of bony healing.13,14 We conducted a study to determine the clinical and radiographic characteristics associated with the diagnosis of early or active spondylolysis.

Materials and Methods

The study was reviewed and approved by the local institutional review board. Using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis code for spondylolysis (756.11), we retrospectively identified patients (age, 12-21 years) from 2002–2011 billing data from a single specialty spine practice. Baseline data—including height, weight, sex, age, symptom duration, sporting activities, defect location, pain score, and previous treatments—were collected from a standardized patient intake questionnaire and office medical records. We also determined radiographic data, including level, laterality (right vs left, unilateral vs bilateral), presence of listhesis, and slip grade and percentage. CT scans were reviewed to confirm the spondylolysis diagnosis and to measure parameters described by Fujii and colleagues.15 These parameters include spondylolysis chronicity (early, progressive, terminal) (Figure 2), distance from defect to posterior margin of vertebral body, and defect angle relative to posterior margin of vertebral body. We also measured sagittal radiographic parameters, including pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis.

Pars lesions were divided into active and inactive defects16 based on signal characteristics on either MRI or SPECT (Figure 3). Defects with a positive SPECT or HSC on T2 MRI were classified as active; all other defects were classified as inactive. All MRIs were reviewed by a radiologist, and any mention of HSC in the pedicle or pars of the corresponding level was considered positive. For the sake of accuracy, all MRIs were also reviewed by a spine surgeon. All CT measurements were done by 1 of 2 authors. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were compared between patients with active defects and patients with inactive defects. Independent t tests and Fisher exact tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Threshold P was set at .01 to account for the small sample size and multiple concurrent comparisons.

Results

Fifty-seven patients (29 males, 28 females) with a total of 108 pars defects (6 unilateral, 102 bilateral) were identified. Mean age was 14.64 years. Of the 108 defects, 49 were classified as active and 59 as inactive. SPECT results were available for 52 defects, MRI results for 85, and CT results for 76 (Table 1). There was no difference between the active and inactive groups in age (14.7 vs 14.6 years; P = .083), body mass index (24.2 vs 21.7 kg/m2; P = .034), symptom duration (236.3 vs 397.4 days; P = .016), lumbar lordosis (27.4° vs 32.1°; P = .097), pelvic incidence (59.0° vs 61.2°; P = .488), slip percentage (9.5% vs 14.2%; P = .034), and laterality (right vs left, P = .847; unilateral vs bilateral, P = .281) (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the active and inactive groups in sex (35 vs 19 males; P < .0001) and presence of listhesis (16 vs 35; P = .006) (Table 2).

 

Of the 49 active defects, 3 were graded as early, 10 as progressive, and 11 as terminal (Table 3). There was a statistically significant (P < .0001) difference between active and inactive lesions for each stage. Mean distance from posterior margin of the vertebral body was 0.57 mm and 0.68 mm for inactive and active lesions, respectively (P = .007). There was no significant difference (P = .294) in the posterior angle of the vertebral body and the defect between inactive (20.54°) and active (24.73°) lesions (Table 3).

 

 

Subanalysis by sex showed no difference in age (males, 16.4 years vs females, 18.7 years; P = .073), slip percentage (10.4% vs 13.4%; P = .168), or presence or absence of slip (25 vs 26; P > .99) (Table 4).

Discussion

Increasing MRI resolution combined with increasing concern about unnecessary radiation exposure has added to the attractiveness of MRI in the diagnosis of spondylolysis. Spondylolysis progresses on a continuum, starting with a stress reaction (early or active defect) and ending with either healing or nonunion of the pars defect (terminal defect) (Figure 4). Although risk factors for progression are not clearly defined, Fujii and colleagues15 showed that the reaction around the defect is the most important factor for osseous union. It would then make sense that the earlier the spondylolytic defect is identified, the higher the likelihood for union, especially with nonoperative treatment such as rest, activity restriction, and bracing.12,17

There is a lack of consensus regarding MRI use in the diagnosis of spondylolysis. Masci and colleagues18 prospectively evaluated 50 defects in 39 patients using a 1.5-Tesla MRI scanner, concluded MRI is inferior to SPECT/CT, and recommended that SPECT remain the first-line advanced imaging modality. Conversely, Campbell and colleagues4 prospectively evaluated 40 defects in 22 patients using a 1.0-Tesla magnet and concluded that MRI can be used as an effective and reliable first-line advanced imaging modality. These are the only 2 prospective studies conducted within the past decade. Both were underpowered and used outdated technology (newer MRI scanners use 3.0-Tesla magnets). In addition, specific imaging characteristics (eg, edema in pars or pedicle on fluid-specific sequences) that suggest a positive finding—versus overt fracture on T1 MRI—have been recently emphasized. Neither Masci and colleagues18 nor Campbell and colleagues4 detailed what constituted a positive MRI finding. Although an adequately powered prospective study will provide a better analysis of the utility of MRI versus SPECT, such a study is costly and time-consuming. It is important to identify patient and lesion characteristics to help optimize the usefulness of MRI. It is also important to identify the subset of patients most likely to experience osseous healing of active defects,16 as this is the same subset of patients most likely to respond to nonoperative treatment.

We conducted the present study to identify any clinical or radiographic characteristics associated with the diagnosis of early or active spondylolysis. Almost equal numbers of active and inactive defects (49, 59) were identified. There were no differences in patient characteristics, including age, body mass index, and symptom duration. However, there was a significant sex difference—a relatively high proportion of males with active spondylolysis. This finding, which had been reported before,16,19,20 is probably the result of several factors, including males’ lower lumbar spine bone mineral density21; their relatively less spinal flexibility, which affects the distribution of torsional loads on the spine22; and their relatively greater participation in sports, especially sports involving high-velocity, torsional loading of the lumbar spine.23 Studies are needed to delineate the extent to which sex influences the development and persistence of active spondylolytic lesions. Alternatively, a subanalysis revealed an age difference, between our female and male cohorts (18.7 vs 16.4 years), that may have contributed to the high proportion of males with active spondylolysis.

Although the groups’ difference in symptom duration was not significant, it was trending toward significance. As discussed, it could be explained that, along the continuum of disease, earlier defects are more active and either achieve fibrous or osseous union or become chronic and “burn out” to inactive lesions, potentially leading to a listhesis.24 The listhesis association was higher in the inactive group than in the active group (P = .006). The difference in numbers of active and inactive defects at each stage (early, progressive, late) confirms this finding, with no inactive lesions in the early and progressive stages and many fewer active lesions in the terminal stage. Overall, presence of a spondylolisthesis on plain radiographs may obviate the need for SPECT or MRI, as it indicates an inactive chronic lesion—unless new symptoms are suspicious for reactivation or development of previously described adjacent-level pars defects.

No other radiographic parameters were found to be significant—consistent with findings of other studies.2,5,16 Pelvic incidence has been shown to predict progression of spondylisthesis, but under our study parameters it appears not to be associated with development of a slip.

This study had several weaknesses. First, it was retrospective, and imaging parameters were inconsistent, as we included patients who underwent imaging at other facilities. Second, the timing of imaging was inconsistent. Ideally, the same sequence protocol would be used, and all imaging studies (MRI, SPECT, CT) would be performed within a specific period after the initial concern for a spondylolysis was raised. Last, not all patients underwent all 3 advanced imaging modalities; having all 3 would have allowed for a retrospective comparison of MRI and SPECT sensitivity in detecting spondylolysis. Such a comparison would have been interesting, though it was not the goal of this study.

 

 

With its technological improvements and lack of radiation exposure, MRI is becoming more attractive as a first-line advanced imaging modality. Although the superiority of MRI over SPECT is yet to be confirmed, clinical use of MRI in the evaluation of spondylolysis seems to be increasing. It is therefore important to characterize the spondylolytic defects that are readily detected with MRI.

Active or early juvenile spondylolysis appears to be associated with males and absence of an associated listhesis. These clinical and radiographic characteristics may be important in the identification of patients with higher potential for osseous healing after nonoperative treatment.

References

1.    Micheli LJ, Wood R. Back pain in young athletes. Significant differences from adults in causes and patterns. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995;149(1):15-18.

2.    Sakai T, Sairyo K, Suzue N, Kosaka H, Yasui N. Incidence and etiology of lumbar spondylolysis: review of the literature. J Orthop Sci. 2010;15(3):281-288.

3.    Standaert CJ, Herring SA. Expert opinion and controversies in sports and musculoskeletal medicine: the diagnosis and treatment of spondylolysis in adolescent athletes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(4):537-540.

4.    Campbell RS, Grainger AJ, Hide IG, Papastefanou S, Greenough CG. Juvenile spondylolysis: a comparative analysis of CT, SPECT and MRI. Skeletal Radiol. 2005;34(2):63-73.

5.    Kalichman L, Kim DH, Li L, Guermazi A, Berkin V, Hunter DJ. Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: prevalence and association with low back pain in the adult community-based population. Spine. 2009;34(2):199-205.

6.    Zukotynski K, Curtis C, Grant FD, Micheli L, Treves ST. The value of SPECT in the detection of stress injury to the pars interarticularis in patients with low back pain. J Orthop Surg Res. 2010;5:13.

7.    Leone A, Cianfoni A, Cerase A, Magarelli N, Bonomo L. Lumbar spondylolysis: a review. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40(6):683-700.

8.    Gregory PL, Batt ME, Kerslake RW, Scammell BE, Webb JF. The value of combining single photon emission computerised tomography and computerised tomography in the investigation of spondylolysis. Eur Spine J. 2004;13(6):503-509.

9.    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277-2284.

10.  Brenner DJ, Shuryak I, Einstein AJ. Impact of reduced patient life expectancy on potential cancer risks from radiologic imaging. Radiology. 2011;261(1):193-198.

11.  Sairyo K, Sakai T, Yasui N, Dezawa A. Conservative treatment for pediatric lumbar spondylolysis to achieve bone healing using a hard brace: what type and how long?: Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(6):610-614.

12.  Steiner ME, Micheli LJ. Treatment of symptomatic spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis with the modified Boston brace. Spine. 1985;10(10):937-943.

13.  Sairyo K, Katoh S, Takata Y, et al. MRI signal changes of the pedicle as an indicator for early diagnosis of spondylolysis in children and adolescents: a clinical and biomechanical study. Spine. 2006;31(2):206-211.

14.  Sakai T, Sairyo K, Mima S, Yasui N. Significance of magnetic resonance imaging signal change in the pedicle in the management of pediatric lumbar spondylolysis. Spine. 2010;35(14):E641-E645.

15.  Fujii K, Katoh S, Sairyo K, Ikata T, Yasui N. Union of defects in the pars interarticularis of the lumbar spine in children and adolescents. The radiological outcome after conservative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86(2):225-231.

16.  Gregg CD, Dean S, Schneiders AG. Variables associated with active spondylolysis. Phys Ther Sport. 2009;10(4):121-124.

17.  Kobayashi A, Kobayashi T, Kato K, Higuchi H, Takagishi K. Diagnosis of radiographically occult lumbar spondylolysis in young athletes by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(1):169-176.

18.  Masci L, Pike J, Malara F, Phillips B, Bennell K, Brukner P. Use of the one-legged hyperextension test and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of active spondylolysis. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40(11):940-946.

19.  Beutler WJ, Fredrickson BE, Murtland A, Sweeney CA, Grant WD, Baker D. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: 45-year follow-up evaluation. Spine. 2003;28(10):1027-1035.

20.  Miller SF, Congeni J, Swanson K. Long-term functional and anatomical follow-up of early detected spondylolysis in young athletes. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(4):928-933.

21.  Zanchetta JR, Plotkin H, Alvarez Filgueira ML. Bone mass in children: normative values for the 2-20-year-old population. Bone. 1995;16(4 suppl):393S-399S.

22.  Kondratek M, Krauss J, Stiller C, Olson R. Normative values for active lumbar range of motion in children. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2007;19(3):236-244.

23.  Hardcastle P, Annear P, Foster DH, et al. Spinal abnormalities in young fast bowlers. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74(3):421-425.

24.  Fredrickson BE, Baker D, McHolick WJ, Yuan HA, Lubicky JP. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66(5):699-707.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Jeffrey L. Gum, MD, Charles H. Crawford III, MD, Philip C. Collis, MD, and Leah Y. Carreon, MD, MSc

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E379-E383
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, defects, juvenile, spondylolysis, lumbar spondylolysis, lumbar, treatment, computed tomography, CT, single-photon emission computed tomography, SPECT, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, radiography, adolescent, sports medicine, athletes, gum, crawford, collis, carreon
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Jeffrey L. Gum, MD, Charles H. Crawford III, MD, Philip C. Collis, MD, and Leah Y. Carreon, MD, MSc

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Jeffrey L. Gum, MD, Charles H. Crawford III, MD, Philip C. Collis, MD, and Leah Y. Carreon, MD, MSc

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Spondylolysis, a defect in the pars interarticularis, is the single most common identifiable source of persistent low back pain in adolescent athletes.1,2 The diagnosis of spondylolysis is confirmed by radiographic imaging.3 However, there is controversy regarding which imaging modality is preferred—specifically, which to use for first-line advanced imaging after plain radiographs are obtained.3 Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) consistently has been shown to be the most sensitive modality, and it is considered the gold standard.4-7 Patients with a positive SPECT scan are then routinely imaged with computed tomography (CT) for bone detail and staging of the pars defect.8 This imaging or diagnostic sequence yields organ-specific radiation doses (15-30 mSv) as much as 50-fold higher than those of plain radiography.9 Recent epidemiologic studies have shown that this organ dose results in an increased risk of cancer, especially in children.10

Diagnosis is crucial in early-stage lumbar spondylolysis, as osseous healing can occur with conservative treatment.11,12 High signal change (HSC) in the pedicle or pars interarticularis (Figure 1) on fluid-specific (T2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences has been shown to be important in the diagnosis of early spondylolysis and, subsequently, a good predictor of bony healing.13,14 We conducted a study to determine the clinical and radiographic characteristics associated with the diagnosis of early or active spondylolysis.

Materials and Methods

The study was reviewed and approved by the local institutional review board. Using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis code for spondylolysis (756.11), we retrospectively identified patients (age, 12-21 years) from 2002–2011 billing data from a single specialty spine practice. Baseline data—including height, weight, sex, age, symptom duration, sporting activities, defect location, pain score, and previous treatments—were collected from a standardized patient intake questionnaire and office medical records. We also determined radiographic data, including level, laterality (right vs left, unilateral vs bilateral), presence of listhesis, and slip grade and percentage. CT scans were reviewed to confirm the spondylolysis diagnosis and to measure parameters described by Fujii and colleagues.15 These parameters include spondylolysis chronicity (early, progressive, terminal) (Figure 2), distance from defect to posterior margin of vertebral body, and defect angle relative to posterior margin of vertebral body. We also measured sagittal radiographic parameters, including pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis.

Pars lesions were divided into active and inactive defects16 based on signal characteristics on either MRI or SPECT (Figure 3). Defects with a positive SPECT or HSC on T2 MRI were classified as active; all other defects were classified as inactive. All MRIs were reviewed by a radiologist, and any mention of HSC in the pedicle or pars of the corresponding level was considered positive. For the sake of accuracy, all MRIs were also reviewed by a spine surgeon. All CT measurements were done by 1 of 2 authors. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were compared between patients with active defects and patients with inactive defects. Independent t tests and Fisher exact tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Threshold P was set at .01 to account for the small sample size and multiple concurrent comparisons.

Results

Fifty-seven patients (29 males, 28 females) with a total of 108 pars defects (6 unilateral, 102 bilateral) were identified. Mean age was 14.64 years. Of the 108 defects, 49 were classified as active and 59 as inactive. SPECT results were available for 52 defects, MRI results for 85, and CT results for 76 (Table 1). There was no difference between the active and inactive groups in age (14.7 vs 14.6 years; P = .083), body mass index (24.2 vs 21.7 kg/m2; P = .034), symptom duration (236.3 vs 397.4 days; P = .016), lumbar lordosis (27.4° vs 32.1°; P = .097), pelvic incidence (59.0° vs 61.2°; P = .488), slip percentage (9.5% vs 14.2%; P = .034), and laterality (right vs left, P = .847; unilateral vs bilateral, P = .281) (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the active and inactive groups in sex (35 vs 19 males; P < .0001) and presence of listhesis (16 vs 35; P = .006) (Table 2).

 

Of the 49 active defects, 3 were graded as early, 10 as progressive, and 11 as terminal (Table 3). There was a statistically significant (P < .0001) difference between active and inactive lesions for each stage. Mean distance from posterior margin of the vertebral body was 0.57 mm and 0.68 mm for inactive and active lesions, respectively (P = .007). There was no significant difference (P = .294) in the posterior angle of the vertebral body and the defect between inactive (20.54°) and active (24.73°) lesions (Table 3).

 

 

Subanalysis by sex showed no difference in age (males, 16.4 years vs females, 18.7 years; P = .073), slip percentage (10.4% vs 13.4%; P = .168), or presence or absence of slip (25 vs 26; P > .99) (Table 4).

Discussion

Increasing MRI resolution combined with increasing concern about unnecessary radiation exposure has added to the attractiveness of MRI in the diagnosis of spondylolysis. Spondylolysis progresses on a continuum, starting with a stress reaction (early or active defect) and ending with either healing or nonunion of the pars defect (terminal defect) (Figure 4). Although risk factors for progression are not clearly defined, Fujii and colleagues15 showed that the reaction around the defect is the most important factor for osseous union. It would then make sense that the earlier the spondylolytic defect is identified, the higher the likelihood for union, especially with nonoperative treatment such as rest, activity restriction, and bracing.12,17

There is a lack of consensus regarding MRI use in the diagnosis of spondylolysis. Masci and colleagues18 prospectively evaluated 50 defects in 39 patients using a 1.5-Tesla MRI scanner, concluded MRI is inferior to SPECT/CT, and recommended that SPECT remain the first-line advanced imaging modality. Conversely, Campbell and colleagues4 prospectively evaluated 40 defects in 22 patients using a 1.0-Tesla magnet and concluded that MRI can be used as an effective and reliable first-line advanced imaging modality. These are the only 2 prospective studies conducted within the past decade. Both were underpowered and used outdated technology (newer MRI scanners use 3.0-Tesla magnets). In addition, specific imaging characteristics (eg, edema in pars or pedicle on fluid-specific sequences) that suggest a positive finding—versus overt fracture on T1 MRI—have been recently emphasized. Neither Masci and colleagues18 nor Campbell and colleagues4 detailed what constituted a positive MRI finding. Although an adequately powered prospective study will provide a better analysis of the utility of MRI versus SPECT, such a study is costly and time-consuming. It is important to identify patient and lesion characteristics to help optimize the usefulness of MRI. It is also important to identify the subset of patients most likely to experience osseous healing of active defects,16 as this is the same subset of patients most likely to respond to nonoperative treatment.

We conducted the present study to identify any clinical or radiographic characteristics associated with the diagnosis of early or active spondylolysis. Almost equal numbers of active and inactive defects (49, 59) were identified. There were no differences in patient characteristics, including age, body mass index, and symptom duration. However, there was a significant sex difference—a relatively high proportion of males with active spondylolysis. This finding, which had been reported before,16,19,20 is probably the result of several factors, including males’ lower lumbar spine bone mineral density21; their relatively less spinal flexibility, which affects the distribution of torsional loads on the spine22; and their relatively greater participation in sports, especially sports involving high-velocity, torsional loading of the lumbar spine.23 Studies are needed to delineate the extent to which sex influences the development and persistence of active spondylolytic lesions. Alternatively, a subanalysis revealed an age difference, between our female and male cohorts (18.7 vs 16.4 years), that may have contributed to the high proportion of males with active spondylolysis.

Although the groups’ difference in symptom duration was not significant, it was trending toward significance. As discussed, it could be explained that, along the continuum of disease, earlier defects are more active and either achieve fibrous or osseous union or become chronic and “burn out” to inactive lesions, potentially leading to a listhesis.24 The listhesis association was higher in the inactive group than in the active group (P = .006). The difference in numbers of active and inactive defects at each stage (early, progressive, late) confirms this finding, with no inactive lesions in the early and progressive stages and many fewer active lesions in the terminal stage. Overall, presence of a spondylolisthesis on plain radiographs may obviate the need for SPECT or MRI, as it indicates an inactive chronic lesion—unless new symptoms are suspicious for reactivation or development of previously described adjacent-level pars defects.

No other radiographic parameters were found to be significant—consistent with findings of other studies.2,5,16 Pelvic incidence has been shown to predict progression of spondylisthesis, but under our study parameters it appears not to be associated with development of a slip.

This study had several weaknesses. First, it was retrospective, and imaging parameters were inconsistent, as we included patients who underwent imaging at other facilities. Second, the timing of imaging was inconsistent. Ideally, the same sequence protocol would be used, and all imaging studies (MRI, SPECT, CT) would be performed within a specific period after the initial concern for a spondylolysis was raised. Last, not all patients underwent all 3 advanced imaging modalities; having all 3 would have allowed for a retrospective comparison of MRI and SPECT sensitivity in detecting spondylolysis. Such a comparison would have been interesting, though it was not the goal of this study.

 

 

With its technological improvements and lack of radiation exposure, MRI is becoming more attractive as a first-line advanced imaging modality. Although the superiority of MRI over SPECT is yet to be confirmed, clinical use of MRI in the evaluation of spondylolysis seems to be increasing. It is therefore important to characterize the spondylolytic defects that are readily detected with MRI.

Active or early juvenile spondylolysis appears to be associated with males and absence of an associated listhesis. These clinical and radiographic characteristics may be important in the identification of patients with higher potential for osseous healing after nonoperative treatment.

Spondylolysis, a defect in the pars interarticularis, is the single most common identifiable source of persistent low back pain in adolescent athletes.1,2 The diagnosis of spondylolysis is confirmed by radiographic imaging.3 However, there is controversy regarding which imaging modality is preferred—specifically, which to use for first-line advanced imaging after plain radiographs are obtained.3 Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) consistently has been shown to be the most sensitive modality, and it is considered the gold standard.4-7 Patients with a positive SPECT scan are then routinely imaged with computed tomography (CT) for bone detail and staging of the pars defect.8 This imaging or diagnostic sequence yields organ-specific radiation doses (15-30 mSv) as much as 50-fold higher than those of plain radiography.9 Recent epidemiologic studies have shown that this organ dose results in an increased risk of cancer, especially in children.10

Diagnosis is crucial in early-stage lumbar spondylolysis, as osseous healing can occur with conservative treatment.11,12 High signal change (HSC) in the pedicle or pars interarticularis (Figure 1) on fluid-specific (T2) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences has been shown to be important in the diagnosis of early spondylolysis and, subsequently, a good predictor of bony healing.13,14 We conducted a study to determine the clinical and radiographic characteristics associated with the diagnosis of early or active spondylolysis.

Materials and Methods

The study was reviewed and approved by the local institutional review board. Using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis code for spondylolysis (756.11), we retrospectively identified patients (age, 12-21 years) from 2002–2011 billing data from a single specialty spine practice. Baseline data—including height, weight, sex, age, symptom duration, sporting activities, defect location, pain score, and previous treatments—were collected from a standardized patient intake questionnaire and office medical records. We also determined radiographic data, including level, laterality (right vs left, unilateral vs bilateral), presence of listhesis, and slip grade and percentage. CT scans were reviewed to confirm the spondylolysis diagnosis and to measure parameters described by Fujii and colleagues.15 These parameters include spondylolysis chronicity (early, progressive, terminal) (Figure 2), distance from defect to posterior margin of vertebral body, and defect angle relative to posterior margin of vertebral body. We also measured sagittal radiographic parameters, including pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis.

Pars lesions were divided into active and inactive defects16 based on signal characteristics on either MRI or SPECT (Figure 3). Defects with a positive SPECT or HSC on T2 MRI were classified as active; all other defects were classified as inactive. All MRIs were reviewed by a radiologist, and any mention of HSC in the pedicle or pars of the corresponding level was considered positive. For the sake of accuracy, all MRIs were also reviewed by a spine surgeon. All CT measurements were done by 1 of 2 authors. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were compared between patients with active defects and patients with inactive defects. Independent t tests and Fisher exact tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Threshold P was set at .01 to account for the small sample size and multiple concurrent comparisons.

Results

Fifty-seven patients (29 males, 28 females) with a total of 108 pars defects (6 unilateral, 102 bilateral) were identified. Mean age was 14.64 years. Of the 108 defects, 49 were classified as active and 59 as inactive. SPECT results were available for 52 defects, MRI results for 85, and CT results for 76 (Table 1). There was no difference between the active and inactive groups in age (14.7 vs 14.6 years; P = .083), body mass index (24.2 vs 21.7 kg/m2; P = .034), symptom duration (236.3 vs 397.4 days; P = .016), lumbar lordosis (27.4° vs 32.1°; P = .097), pelvic incidence (59.0° vs 61.2°; P = .488), slip percentage (9.5% vs 14.2%; P = .034), and laterality (right vs left, P = .847; unilateral vs bilateral, P = .281) (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the active and inactive groups in sex (35 vs 19 males; P < .0001) and presence of listhesis (16 vs 35; P = .006) (Table 2).

 

Of the 49 active defects, 3 were graded as early, 10 as progressive, and 11 as terminal (Table 3). There was a statistically significant (P < .0001) difference between active and inactive lesions for each stage. Mean distance from posterior margin of the vertebral body was 0.57 mm and 0.68 mm for inactive and active lesions, respectively (P = .007). There was no significant difference (P = .294) in the posterior angle of the vertebral body and the defect between inactive (20.54°) and active (24.73°) lesions (Table 3).

 

 

Subanalysis by sex showed no difference in age (males, 16.4 years vs females, 18.7 years; P = .073), slip percentage (10.4% vs 13.4%; P = .168), or presence or absence of slip (25 vs 26; P > .99) (Table 4).

Discussion

Increasing MRI resolution combined with increasing concern about unnecessary radiation exposure has added to the attractiveness of MRI in the diagnosis of spondylolysis. Spondylolysis progresses on a continuum, starting with a stress reaction (early or active defect) and ending with either healing or nonunion of the pars defect (terminal defect) (Figure 4). Although risk factors for progression are not clearly defined, Fujii and colleagues15 showed that the reaction around the defect is the most important factor for osseous union. It would then make sense that the earlier the spondylolytic defect is identified, the higher the likelihood for union, especially with nonoperative treatment such as rest, activity restriction, and bracing.12,17

There is a lack of consensus regarding MRI use in the diagnosis of spondylolysis. Masci and colleagues18 prospectively evaluated 50 defects in 39 patients using a 1.5-Tesla MRI scanner, concluded MRI is inferior to SPECT/CT, and recommended that SPECT remain the first-line advanced imaging modality. Conversely, Campbell and colleagues4 prospectively evaluated 40 defects in 22 patients using a 1.0-Tesla magnet and concluded that MRI can be used as an effective and reliable first-line advanced imaging modality. These are the only 2 prospective studies conducted within the past decade. Both were underpowered and used outdated technology (newer MRI scanners use 3.0-Tesla magnets). In addition, specific imaging characteristics (eg, edema in pars or pedicle on fluid-specific sequences) that suggest a positive finding—versus overt fracture on T1 MRI—have been recently emphasized. Neither Masci and colleagues18 nor Campbell and colleagues4 detailed what constituted a positive MRI finding. Although an adequately powered prospective study will provide a better analysis of the utility of MRI versus SPECT, such a study is costly and time-consuming. It is important to identify patient and lesion characteristics to help optimize the usefulness of MRI. It is also important to identify the subset of patients most likely to experience osseous healing of active defects,16 as this is the same subset of patients most likely to respond to nonoperative treatment.

We conducted the present study to identify any clinical or radiographic characteristics associated with the diagnosis of early or active spondylolysis. Almost equal numbers of active and inactive defects (49, 59) were identified. There were no differences in patient characteristics, including age, body mass index, and symptom duration. However, there was a significant sex difference—a relatively high proportion of males with active spondylolysis. This finding, which had been reported before,16,19,20 is probably the result of several factors, including males’ lower lumbar spine bone mineral density21; their relatively less spinal flexibility, which affects the distribution of torsional loads on the spine22; and their relatively greater participation in sports, especially sports involving high-velocity, torsional loading of the lumbar spine.23 Studies are needed to delineate the extent to which sex influences the development and persistence of active spondylolytic lesions. Alternatively, a subanalysis revealed an age difference, between our female and male cohorts (18.7 vs 16.4 years), that may have contributed to the high proportion of males with active spondylolysis.

Although the groups’ difference in symptom duration was not significant, it was trending toward significance. As discussed, it could be explained that, along the continuum of disease, earlier defects are more active and either achieve fibrous or osseous union or become chronic and “burn out” to inactive lesions, potentially leading to a listhesis.24 The listhesis association was higher in the inactive group than in the active group (P = .006). The difference in numbers of active and inactive defects at each stage (early, progressive, late) confirms this finding, with no inactive lesions in the early and progressive stages and many fewer active lesions in the terminal stage. Overall, presence of a spondylolisthesis on plain radiographs may obviate the need for SPECT or MRI, as it indicates an inactive chronic lesion—unless new symptoms are suspicious for reactivation or development of previously described adjacent-level pars defects.

No other radiographic parameters were found to be significant—consistent with findings of other studies.2,5,16 Pelvic incidence has been shown to predict progression of spondylisthesis, but under our study parameters it appears not to be associated with development of a slip.

This study had several weaknesses. First, it was retrospective, and imaging parameters were inconsistent, as we included patients who underwent imaging at other facilities. Second, the timing of imaging was inconsistent. Ideally, the same sequence protocol would be used, and all imaging studies (MRI, SPECT, CT) would be performed within a specific period after the initial concern for a spondylolysis was raised. Last, not all patients underwent all 3 advanced imaging modalities; having all 3 would have allowed for a retrospective comparison of MRI and SPECT sensitivity in detecting spondylolysis. Such a comparison would have been interesting, though it was not the goal of this study.

 

 

With its technological improvements and lack of radiation exposure, MRI is becoming more attractive as a first-line advanced imaging modality. Although the superiority of MRI over SPECT is yet to be confirmed, clinical use of MRI in the evaluation of spondylolysis seems to be increasing. It is therefore important to characterize the spondylolytic defects that are readily detected with MRI.

Active or early juvenile spondylolysis appears to be associated with males and absence of an associated listhesis. These clinical and radiographic characteristics may be important in the identification of patients with higher potential for osseous healing after nonoperative treatment.

References

1.    Micheli LJ, Wood R. Back pain in young athletes. Significant differences from adults in causes and patterns. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995;149(1):15-18.

2.    Sakai T, Sairyo K, Suzue N, Kosaka H, Yasui N. Incidence and etiology of lumbar spondylolysis: review of the literature. J Orthop Sci. 2010;15(3):281-288.

3.    Standaert CJ, Herring SA. Expert opinion and controversies in sports and musculoskeletal medicine: the diagnosis and treatment of spondylolysis in adolescent athletes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(4):537-540.

4.    Campbell RS, Grainger AJ, Hide IG, Papastefanou S, Greenough CG. Juvenile spondylolysis: a comparative analysis of CT, SPECT and MRI. Skeletal Radiol. 2005;34(2):63-73.

5.    Kalichman L, Kim DH, Li L, Guermazi A, Berkin V, Hunter DJ. Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: prevalence and association with low back pain in the adult community-based population. Spine. 2009;34(2):199-205.

6.    Zukotynski K, Curtis C, Grant FD, Micheli L, Treves ST. The value of SPECT in the detection of stress injury to the pars interarticularis in patients with low back pain. J Orthop Surg Res. 2010;5:13.

7.    Leone A, Cianfoni A, Cerase A, Magarelli N, Bonomo L. Lumbar spondylolysis: a review. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40(6):683-700.

8.    Gregory PL, Batt ME, Kerslake RW, Scammell BE, Webb JF. The value of combining single photon emission computerised tomography and computerised tomography in the investigation of spondylolysis. Eur Spine J. 2004;13(6):503-509.

9.    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277-2284.

10.  Brenner DJ, Shuryak I, Einstein AJ. Impact of reduced patient life expectancy on potential cancer risks from radiologic imaging. Radiology. 2011;261(1):193-198.

11.  Sairyo K, Sakai T, Yasui N, Dezawa A. Conservative treatment for pediatric lumbar spondylolysis to achieve bone healing using a hard brace: what type and how long?: Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(6):610-614.

12.  Steiner ME, Micheli LJ. Treatment of symptomatic spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis with the modified Boston brace. Spine. 1985;10(10):937-943.

13.  Sairyo K, Katoh S, Takata Y, et al. MRI signal changes of the pedicle as an indicator for early diagnosis of spondylolysis in children and adolescents: a clinical and biomechanical study. Spine. 2006;31(2):206-211.

14.  Sakai T, Sairyo K, Mima S, Yasui N. Significance of magnetic resonance imaging signal change in the pedicle in the management of pediatric lumbar spondylolysis. Spine. 2010;35(14):E641-E645.

15.  Fujii K, Katoh S, Sairyo K, Ikata T, Yasui N. Union of defects in the pars interarticularis of the lumbar spine in children and adolescents. The radiological outcome after conservative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86(2):225-231.

16.  Gregg CD, Dean S, Schneiders AG. Variables associated with active spondylolysis. Phys Ther Sport. 2009;10(4):121-124.

17.  Kobayashi A, Kobayashi T, Kato K, Higuchi H, Takagishi K. Diagnosis of radiographically occult lumbar spondylolysis in young athletes by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(1):169-176.

18.  Masci L, Pike J, Malara F, Phillips B, Bennell K, Brukner P. Use of the one-legged hyperextension test and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of active spondylolysis. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40(11):940-946.

19.  Beutler WJ, Fredrickson BE, Murtland A, Sweeney CA, Grant WD, Baker D. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: 45-year follow-up evaluation. Spine. 2003;28(10):1027-1035.

20.  Miller SF, Congeni J, Swanson K. Long-term functional and anatomical follow-up of early detected spondylolysis in young athletes. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(4):928-933.

21.  Zanchetta JR, Plotkin H, Alvarez Filgueira ML. Bone mass in children: normative values for the 2-20-year-old population. Bone. 1995;16(4 suppl):393S-399S.

22.  Kondratek M, Krauss J, Stiller C, Olson R. Normative values for active lumbar range of motion in children. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2007;19(3):236-244.

23.  Hardcastle P, Annear P, Foster DH, et al. Spinal abnormalities in young fast bowlers. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74(3):421-425.

24.  Fredrickson BE, Baker D, McHolick WJ, Yuan HA, Lubicky JP. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66(5):699-707.

References

1.    Micheli LJ, Wood R. Back pain in young athletes. Significant differences from adults in causes and patterns. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1995;149(1):15-18.

2.    Sakai T, Sairyo K, Suzue N, Kosaka H, Yasui N. Incidence and etiology of lumbar spondylolysis: review of the literature. J Orthop Sci. 2010;15(3):281-288.

3.    Standaert CJ, Herring SA. Expert opinion and controversies in sports and musculoskeletal medicine: the diagnosis and treatment of spondylolysis in adolescent athletes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(4):537-540.

4.    Campbell RS, Grainger AJ, Hide IG, Papastefanou S, Greenough CG. Juvenile spondylolysis: a comparative analysis of CT, SPECT and MRI. Skeletal Radiol. 2005;34(2):63-73.

5.    Kalichman L, Kim DH, Li L, Guermazi A, Berkin V, Hunter DJ. Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: prevalence and association with low back pain in the adult community-based population. Spine. 2009;34(2):199-205.

6.    Zukotynski K, Curtis C, Grant FD, Micheli L, Treves ST. The value of SPECT in the detection of stress injury to the pars interarticularis in patients with low back pain. J Orthop Surg Res. 2010;5:13.

7.    Leone A, Cianfoni A, Cerase A, Magarelli N, Bonomo L. Lumbar spondylolysis: a review. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40(6):683-700.

8.    Gregory PL, Batt ME, Kerslake RW, Scammell BE, Webb JF. The value of combining single photon emission computerised tomography and computerised tomography in the investigation of spondylolysis. Eur Spine J. 2004;13(6):503-509.

9.    Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(22):2277-2284.

10.  Brenner DJ, Shuryak I, Einstein AJ. Impact of reduced patient life expectancy on potential cancer risks from radiologic imaging. Radiology. 2011;261(1):193-198.

11.  Sairyo K, Sakai T, Yasui N, Dezawa A. Conservative treatment for pediatric lumbar spondylolysis to achieve bone healing using a hard brace: what type and how long?: Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(6):610-614.

12.  Steiner ME, Micheli LJ. Treatment of symptomatic spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis with the modified Boston brace. Spine. 1985;10(10):937-943.

13.  Sairyo K, Katoh S, Takata Y, et al. MRI signal changes of the pedicle as an indicator for early diagnosis of spondylolysis in children and adolescents: a clinical and biomechanical study. Spine. 2006;31(2):206-211.

14.  Sakai T, Sairyo K, Mima S, Yasui N. Significance of magnetic resonance imaging signal change in the pedicle in the management of pediatric lumbar spondylolysis. Spine. 2010;35(14):E641-E645.

15.  Fujii K, Katoh S, Sairyo K, Ikata T, Yasui N. Union of defects in the pars interarticularis of the lumbar spine in children and adolescents. The radiological outcome after conservative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86(2):225-231.

16.  Gregg CD, Dean S, Schneiders AG. Variables associated with active spondylolysis. Phys Ther Sport. 2009;10(4):121-124.

17.  Kobayashi A, Kobayashi T, Kato K, Higuchi H, Takagishi K. Diagnosis of radiographically occult lumbar spondylolysis in young athletes by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(1):169-176.

18.  Masci L, Pike J, Malara F, Phillips B, Bennell K, Brukner P. Use of the one-legged hyperextension test and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of active spondylolysis. Br J Sports Med. 2006;40(11):940-946.

19.  Beutler WJ, Fredrickson BE, Murtland A, Sweeney CA, Grant WD, Baker D. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: 45-year follow-up evaluation. Spine. 2003;28(10):1027-1035.

20.  Miller SF, Congeni J, Swanson K. Long-term functional and anatomical follow-up of early detected spondylolysis in young athletes. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(4):928-933.

21.  Zanchetta JR, Plotkin H, Alvarez Filgueira ML. Bone mass in children: normative values for the 2-20-year-old population. Bone. 1995;16(4 suppl):393S-399S.

22.  Kondratek M, Krauss J, Stiller C, Olson R. Normative values for active lumbar range of motion in children. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2007;19(3):236-244.

23.  Hardcastle P, Annear P, Foster DH, et al. Spinal abnormalities in young fast bowlers. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74(3):421-425.

24.  Fredrickson BE, Baker D, McHolick WJ, Yuan HA, Lubicky JP. The natural history of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66(5):699-707.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Page Number
E379-E383
Page Number
E379-E383
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Characteristics Associated With Active Defects in Juvenile Spondylolysis
Display Headline
Characteristics Associated With Active Defects in Juvenile Spondylolysis
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, defects, juvenile, spondylolysis, lumbar spondylolysis, lumbar, treatment, computed tomography, CT, single-photon emission computed tomography, SPECT, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, radiography, adolescent, sports medicine, athletes, gum, crawford, collis, carreon
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, defects, juvenile, spondylolysis, lumbar spondylolysis, lumbar, treatment, computed tomography, CT, single-photon emission computed tomography, SPECT, magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, radiography, adolescent, sports medicine, athletes, gum, crawford, collis, carreon
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Using 3-Dimensional Fluoroscopy to Assess Acute Clavicle Fracture Displacement: A Radiographic Study

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:31
Display Headline
Using 3-Dimensional Fluoroscopy to Assess Acute Clavicle Fracture Displacement: A Radiographic Study

Clavicle fractures are common injuries, accounting for 2.6% to 5% of all adult fractures.1,2 Most clavicle fractures (69%-82%) occur in the middle third or midshaft.3,4 Midshaft clavicle fractures are often treated successfully with nonoperative means consisting of shoulder immobilization with either a sling or a figure-of-8 brace. Operative indications historically have been limited to open or impending open injuries and to patients with underlying neurovascular compromise. However, recent clinical studies have found that fractures with particular characteristics may benefit from surgical fixation. Important relative indications for open reduction and internal fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures are complete fracture fragment displacement with no cortical contact, and fractures with axial shortening of more than 20 mm.5,6

Accurately determining the extent of displacement and shortening can therefore be important in guiding treatment recommendations. The standard radiographic view for a clavicle fracture is upright or supine anteroposterior (AP). Typically, an AP radiograph with cephalic tilt of about 20° is obtained as well. On occasion, other supplemental radiographs, such as a 45° angulated view, as originally described by Quesada,7 are obtained. To our knowledge, the literature includes only 2 reports of studies that have compared different radiographic views and their accuracy in measuring fracture shortening8,9; no study has determined the best radiographic view for evaluating fracture displacement.

We conducted a study to determine which radiographic view best captures the most fracture fragment displacement. Acute midshaft clavicle fractures were assessed with simulated angled radiographs created from preoperative upright 3-dimensional (3-D) fluoroscopy scans. Our hypothesis was that a radiographic view with 20° of cephalic tilt would most often detect the most fracture displacement. In addition, we retrospectively reviewed our study patients’ initial AP injury radiographs to determine if obtaining a different view at maximum displacement would have helped identify a larger number of completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Patients and Methods

Institutional review board approval was obtained. Using our institution’s trauma registry database, we retrospectively identified 10 cases of patients who had undergone preoperative 3-D fluoroscopy for midshaft clavicle fractures. Study inclusion criteria were age 18 years or older, acute midshaft clavicle fracture, and preoperative 3-D fluoroscopy scan of clavicle available. Pediatric patients, nonacute injuries, and clavicle fractures of the lateral or medial third were excluded.

Three-dimensional fluoroscopy was used when the treating surgeon deemed it necessary for preoperative planning. All imaging was performed with a Philips MultiDiagnost Eleva 3-D fluoroscopy imager with patients in the upright standing position. (Informed patient consent was obtained.) Software bundled with the imager was used to create representative radiographs of differing angulation.

The common practice at most institutions is to obtain 2 radiographic views as part of a standard clavicle series. The additional AP angulated radiograph typically is obtained with 20° to 45° cephalic tilt from the horizontal axis. Therefore, simulated radiographs ranging from 15° to 50° of angulation in 5° increments were created, and the amount of superior displacement of the medial fragment was measured. As the simulated views were constructed from a 3-D composite image, there was none of the magnification error that occurs with AP or posteroanterior (PA) views. The stated degree of angulation mimics a radiograph’s AP cephalic tilt or PA caudal tilt (Figures 1A, 1B). For all radiographic images, displacement between fracture fragments was determined by measuring the distance between the superior cortices at the fracture site of the medial and lateral fragments. Each simulated radiograph was measured by 2 readers using standard computerized radiographic measurement tools. Final displacement was taken as the mean of the 2 measurements.

After determining which radiographic angulation demonstrated the largest number of maximally displaced fractures, we compared the simulated radiographs at that angulation with the injury AP images for all patients. Total number of patients with a completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture and no cortical contact was recorded for the 2 radiographic views.

The Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification system8 was used to classify the clavicle fractures. Statistical analysis was performed with the Fisher exact test and a regression model, using SPSS Version 19.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics).

Results

Ten patients met the study inclusion criteria. Mean age was 32.9 years (range, 18-65 years). Seven of the 10 patients were male. Six patients had right-side clavicle fractures. Of the 10 patients, 5 had the comminuted wedge fracture pattern (15-B2.3), 2 had the simple spiral pattern (15-B1.1), 2 had the spiral wedge pattern (15-B2.1), and 1 had the oblique pattern (15-B1.2).

Table 1 summarizes the fracture displacement measurements obtained with the different radiographic views. Of the 10 cases, 5 showed the most displacement with the 15° tilted view (P = .004), and the other 5 showed maximum displacement with different radiographic angulations. In addition, 6 patients showed the least displacement with the 50° angulated view (P < .001). Results of the regression analysis are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.

 

 

 

Initial horizontal AP imaging showed completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in 9 of the 10 patients, and 15° simulated radiographs showed completely displaced fractures in all 10 patients (P = .50).

Discussion

Our study results demonstrated that an upright 15° radiographic tilt (AP cephalad or PA caudal) identified the most fracture displacement in the most patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures. To our knowledge, this is the first study to identify the radiographic angulation that best shows the most clavicle fracture fragment displacement.

Other investigators have studied the accuracy of different radiographic views in the assessment of midshaft clavicle fractures, but they concentrated on fracture shortening. Smekal and colleagues9 used computed tomography (CT) and 3 different radiographic views to evaluate malunited midshaft clavicle fractures. Comparing the horizontal clavicular length measurements obtained with radiographs and CT scans, they determined that PA thoracic radiographs were in highest agreement with the CT scans. The results, however, were not statistically significant. In their study, supine CT was successful because the fractures were healed, and the displacement and shortening amounts were not affected by patient position. Sharr and Mohammed10 studied the accuracy of different views in the assessment of clavicle length in an articulated cadaver specimen. They obtained multiple AP and PA radiographs of different horizontal (medial, lateral) and vertical (cephalad, caudal) angulations. Actual clavicle length was then directly measured and compared with the length measured on the different views. The authors concluded that a PA 15° caudal radiograph was most accurate in assessing clavicular length. Both Smekal and colleagues9 and Sharr and Mohammed10 recommended the PA radiograph because it decreases the degree of magnification on AP radiographs by minimizing the film-to-object distance.

Our findings are important because more accurate determination of fracture displacement in patients with midshaft clavicle fractures may change clinical management. Nowak and colleagues11 investigated various patient and clavicle fracture characteristics that were predictive of a higher rate of long-term sequelae. They found that complete fracture displacement was the strongest radiographic predictor of patients’ beliefs that they were fully recovered from injury at final follow-up. The authors concluded that fractures with no bony contact should receive more “active” management. Robinson and colleagues12 studied a cohort of patients with nonoperatively managed midshaft clavicle fractures and concluded that complete fracture displacement significantly increased risk for nonunion (this risk was 2.3 times higher in patients with displaced fractures than in patients with nondisplaced fractures). Last, McKee and colleagues13 found that shoulder strength and endurance were significantly decreased in nonoperatively treated displaced midshaft clavicle fractures than in the same patients’ uninjured shoulders.

Extending the results of these studies, recent prospective randomized control trials and a meta-analysis have compared the clinical outcomes of nonoperatively and operatively managed displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.14-18 With few exceptions, these studies found improved clinical results with operative fixation. In one such study, the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society14 randomized patients with displaced midshaft clavicle fractures to either operative plate fixation or sling immobilization. The operative group was found to have improved Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores, improved Constant shoulder scores, increased patient satisfaction, faster mean time to bony fracture union, higher satisfaction with shoulder appearance, and lower rates of nonunion and malunion. Given the results of these studies, accurate identification of a displaced midshaft clavicle fracture with no cortical contact is fundamental in deciding whether to recommend operative fixation.

Retrospective review of our cohort’s initial radiographs revealed 1 case in which the patient’s completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture would not have been diagnosed solely with an AP horizontal image. Cortical contact was seen on a standard AP clavicle radiograph (Figures 2A, 2B), and a 15° tilt radiograph created from 3-D fluoroscopy scan showed complete fracture fragment displacement (Figure 3). A change in fracture classification from partially displaced to fully displaced could alter the type of management used by a treating surgeon.

There were obvious weaknesses to this study. First, its sample size was small (10 patients). Nevertheless, we had sufficient numbers to find a statistically significant angulation. Second, a wider range of radiographic angles could have been studied. Our intent, however, was to investigate the accuracy of the 2 most common supplementary clavicle views (20° and 45° cephalic tilt). Therefore, we selected a range of simulated radiographs that began 5° outside these angulations. Third, we measured only the degree of fracture displacement; we were unable to accurately access fracture shortening, as the 3-D fluoroscopic images were limited to the injured clavicles. A potential solution to this problem is to widen the exposure field in order to include the entire chest and allow clavicular length comparison against the uninjured side. Doing this would have been possible, but at the expense of increasing the patient’s radiation exposure.

 

 

This innovative study used 3-D fluoroscopy to capture clavicle fracture images with patients in an upright position. Unlike standard CT, in which patients are supine, this 3-D imaging technology better emulates the patient positioning used for upright radiographs, thereby avoiding potential fracture fragment alignment changes caused by shifts in body position. In addition, 3-D fluoroscopy allows us to create multiple precise simulated radiographic angulations without the magnification error of AP radiographs and, to a lesser extent, PA radiographs. Having a standing PA 15° caudal tilt radiograph obviates the need for CT with 3-D reconstruction. More fine detail may be revealed by CT with 3-D reconstruction than by a standing PA 15° caudal tilt radiograph, but the patient faces less radiation risk and cost with the radiograph.

There is no consensus as to what constitutes the standard radiographic series for clavicle fractures. Radiographic technique can vary with respect to supplemental view angulation, supine or upright patient positioning, and AP or PA radiographic views. Although our study did not address the effect of supine versus upright patient positioning on acute midshaft clavicle fracture displacement, we think that, for all clinical and research purposes, upright 15° caudal PA radiographs should be obtained for patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures.

Conclusion

Our retrospective study of 10 patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures and preoperative upright 3-D fluoroscopy scans found that a 15° angulated radiograph most often demonstrated the most fracture fragment displacement. Given these findings, we recommend obtaining an additional PA 15° caudal radiograph in the upright position for patients with midshaft clavicle fractures to best assess the extent of fracture displacement. Accurately identifying the degree of fracture displacement is important, as operative management of completely displaced fractures has been shown to improve clinical outcomes.

References

1.    Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, Albo F. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(5):452-456.

2.    Nordqvist A, Petersson C. The incidence of fractures of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(300):127-132.

3.    Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult. Epidemiology and classification. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(3):476-484.

4.    Rowe CR. An atlas of anatomy and treatment of midclavicular fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;(58):29-42.

5.    Jeray KJ. Acute midshaft clavicular fracture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(4):239-248.

6.    Khan LA, Bradnock TJ, Scott C, Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(2):447-460.

7.    Quesada F. Technique for the roentgen diagnosis of fractures of the clavicle. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1926;42:424-428.

8.    Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association Classification, Database and Outcomes Committee. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21(10 suppl):S1-S133.

9.     Smekal V, Deml C, Irenberger A, et al. Length determination in midshaft clavicle fractures: validation of measurement. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22(7):458-462.

10.  Sharr JR, Mohammed KD. Optimizing the radiographic technique in clavicular fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003;12(2):170-172.

11.    Nowak J, Holgersson M, Larsson S. Can we predict long-term sequelae after fractures of the clavicle based on initial findings? A prospective study with nine to ten years of follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13(5):479-486.

12.  Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM, Wakefield AE. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicular fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(7):1359-1365.

13.  McKee MD, Pedersen EM, Jones C, et al. Deficits following nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(1):35-40.

14.  Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(1):1-10.

15.  Judd DB, Pallis MP, Smith E, Bottoni CR. Acute operative stabilization versus nonoperative management of clavicle fractures. Am J Orthop. 2009;38(7):341-345.

16.  Smekal V, Irenberger A, Struve P, Wambacher M, Krappinger D, Kralinger FS. Elastic stable intramedullary nailing versus nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures—a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(2):106-112.

17.  Witzel K. Intramedullary osteosynthesis in fractures of the mid-third of the clavicle in sports traumatology [in German]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2007;145(5):639-642.

18.  McKee RC, Whelan DB, Schemitsch EH, McKee MD. Operative versus nonoperative care of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(8):675-684.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Christopher S. Smith, MD, Patrick C. Schottel, MD, David S. Wellman, MD, Dean G. Lorich, MD, and David L. Helfet, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the US Department of the Navy, US Department of Defense, or the US Government.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E365-E369
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, 3D, 3-D, 3-dimensional, fluoroscopy, clavicle, fracture, fracture management, trauma, radiograph, imaging, radiographic, radiography, scans, smith, schottel, wellman, lorich, helfet
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Christopher S. Smith, MD, Patrick C. Schottel, MD, David S. Wellman, MD, Dean G. Lorich, MD, and David L. Helfet, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the US Department of the Navy, US Department of Defense, or the US Government.

Author and Disclosure Information

Christopher S. Smith, MD, Patrick C. Schottel, MD, David S. Wellman, MD, Dean G. Lorich, MD, and David L. Helfet, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the US Department of the Navy, US Department of Defense, or the US Government.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Clavicle fractures are common injuries, accounting for 2.6% to 5% of all adult fractures.1,2 Most clavicle fractures (69%-82%) occur in the middle third or midshaft.3,4 Midshaft clavicle fractures are often treated successfully with nonoperative means consisting of shoulder immobilization with either a sling or a figure-of-8 brace. Operative indications historically have been limited to open or impending open injuries and to patients with underlying neurovascular compromise. However, recent clinical studies have found that fractures with particular characteristics may benefit from surgical fixation. Important relative indications for open reduction and internal fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures are complete fracture fragment displacement with no cortical contact, and fractures with axial shortening of more than 20 mm.5,6

Accurately determining the extent of displacement and shortening can therefore be important in guiding treatment recommendations. The standard radiographic view for a clavicle fracture is upright or supine anteroposterior (AP). Typically, an AP radiograph with cephalic tilt of about 20° is obtained as well. On occasion, other supplemental radiographs, such as a 45° angulated view, as originally described by Quesada,7 are obtained. To our knowledge, the literature includes only 2 reports of studies that have compared different radiographic views and their accuracy in measuring fracture shortening8,9; no study has determined the best radiographic view for evaluating fracture displacement.

We conducted a study to determine which radiographic view best captures the most fracture fragment displacement. Acute midshaft clavicle fractures were assessed with simulated angled radiographs created from preoperative upright 3-dimensional (3-D) fluoroscopy scans. Our hypothesis was that a radiographic view with 20° of cephalic tilt would most often detect the most fracture displacement. In addition, we retrospectively reviewed our study patients’ initial AP injury radiographs to determine if obtaining a different view at maximum displacement would have helped identify a larger number of completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Patients and Methods

Institutional review board approval was obtained. Using our institution’s trauma registry database, we retrospectively identified 10 cases of patients who had undergone preoperative 3-D fluoroscopy for midshaft clavicle fractures. Study inclusion criteria were age 18 years or older, acute midshaft clavicle fracture, and preoperative 3-D fluoroscopy scan of clavicle available. Pediatric patients, nonacute injuries, and clavicle fractures of the lateral or medial third were excluded.

Three-dimensional fluoroscopy was used when the treating surgeon deemed it necessary for preoperative planning. All imaging was performed with a Philips MultiDiagnost Eleva 3-D fluoroscopy imager with patients in the upright standing position. (Informed patient consent was obtained.) Software bundled with the imager was used to create representative radiographs of differing angulation.

The common practice at most institutions is to obtain 2 radiographic views as part of a standard clavicle series. The additional AP angulated radiograph typically is obtained with 20° to 45° cephalic tilt from the horizontal axis. Therefore, simulated radiographs ranging from 15° to 50° of angulation in 5° increments were created, and the amount of superior displacement of the medial fragment was measured. As the simulated views were constructed from a 3-D composite image, there was none of the magnification error that occurs with AP or posteroanterior (PA) views. The stated degree of angulation mimics a radiograph’s AP cephalic tilt or PA caudal tilt (Figures 1A, 1B). For all radiographic images, displacement between fracture fragments was determined by measuring the distance between the superior cortices at the fracture site of the medial and lateral fragments. Each simulated radiograph was measured by 2 readers using standard computerized radiographic measurement tools. Final displacement was taken as the mean of the 2 measurements.

After determining which radiographic angulation demonstrated the largest number of maximally displaced fractures, we compared the simulated radiographs at that angulation with the injury AP images for all patients. Total number of patients with a completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture and no cortical contact was recorded for the 2 radiographic views.

The Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification system8 was used to classify the clavicle fractures. Statistical analysis was performed with the Fisher exact test and a regression model, using SPSS Version 19.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics).

Results

Ten patients met the study inclusion criteria. Mean age was 32.9 years (range, 18-65 years). Seven of the 10 patients were male. Six patients had right-side clavicle fractures. Of the 10 patients, 5 had the comminuted wedge fracture pattern (15-B2.3), 2 had the simple spiral pattern (15-B1.1), 2 had the spiral wedge pattern (15-B2.1), and 1 had the oblique pattern (15-B1.2).

Table 1 summarizes the fracture displacement measurements obtained with the different radiographic views. Of the 10 cases, 5 showed the most displacement with the 15° tilted view (P = .004), and the other 5 showed maximum displacement with different radiographic angulations. In addition, 6 patients showed the least displacement with the 50° angulated view (P < .001). Results of the regression analysis are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.

 

 

 

Initial horizontal AP imaging showed completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in 9 of the 10 patients, and 15° simulated radiographs showed completely displaced fractures in all 10 patients (P = .50).

Discussion

Our study results demonstrated that an upright 15° radiographic tilt (AP cephalad or PA caudal) identified the most fracture displacement in the most patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures. To our knowledge, this is the first study to identify the radiographic angulation that best shows the most clavicle fracture fragment displacement.

Other investigators have studied the accuracy of different radiographic views in the assessment of midshaft clavicle fractures, but they concentrated on fracture shortening. Smekal and colleagues9 used computed tomography (CT) and 3 different radiographic views to evaluate malunited midshaft clavicle fractures. Comparing the horizontal clavicular length measurements obtained with radiographs and CT scans, they determined that PA thoracic radiographs were in highest agreement with the CT scans. The results, however, were not statistically significant. In their study, supine CT was successful because the fractures were healed, and the displacement and shortening amounts were not affected by patient position. Sharr and Mohammed10 studied the accuracy of different views in the assessment of clavicle length in an articulated cadaver specimen. They obtained multiple AP and PA radiographs of different horizontal (medial, lateral) and vertical (cephalad, caudal) angulations. Actual clavicle length was then directly measured and compared with the length measured on the different views. The authors concluded that a PA 15° caudal radiograph was most accurate in assessing clavicular length. Both Smekal and colleagues9 and Sharr and Mohammed10 recommended the PA radiograph because it decreases the degree of magnification on AP radiographs by minimizing the film-to-object distance.

Our findings are important because more accurate determination of fracture displacement in patients with midshaft clavicle fractures may change clinical management. Nowak and colleagues11 investigated various patient and clavicle fracture characteristics that were predictive of a higher rate of long-term sequelae. They found that complete fracture displacement was the strongest radiographic predictor of patients’ beliefs that they were fully recovered from injury at final follow-up. The authors concluded that fractures with no bony contact should receive more “active” management. Robinson and colleagues12 studied a cohort of patients with nonoperatively managed midshaft clavicle fractures and concluded that complete fracture displacement significantly increased risk for nonunion (this risk was 2.3 times higher in patients with displaced fractures than in patients with nondisplaced fractures). Last, McKee and colleagues13 found that shoulder strength and endurance were significantly decreased in nonoperatively treated displaced midshaft clavicle fractures than in the same patients’ uninjured shoulders.

Extending the results of these studies, recent prospective randomized control trials and a meta-analysis have compared the clinical outcomes of nonoperatively and operatively managed displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.14-18 With few exceptions, these studies found improved clinical results with operative fixation. In one such study, the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society14 randomized patients with displaced midshaft clavicle fractures to either operative plate fixation or sling immobilization. The operative group was found to have improved Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores, improved Constant shoulder scores, increased patient satisfaction, faster mean time to bony fracture union, higher satisfaction with shoulder appearance, and lower rates of nonunion and malunion. Given the results of these studies, accurate identification of a displaced midshaft clavicle fracture with no cortical contact is fundamental in deciding whether to recommend operative fixation.

Retrospective review of our cohort’s initial radiographs revealed 1 case in which the patient’s completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture would not have been diagnosed solely with an AP horizontal image. Cortical contact was seen on a standard AP clavicle radiograph (Figures 2A, 2B), and a 15° tilt radiograph created from 3-D fluoroscopy scan showed complete fracture fragment displacement (Figure 3). A change in fracture classification from partially displaced to fully displaced could alter the type of management used by a treating surgeon.

There were obvious weaknesses to this study. First, its sample size was small (10 patients). Nevertheless, we had sufficient numbers to find a statistically significant angulation. Second, a wider range of radiographic angles could have been studied. Our intent, however, was to investigate the accuracy of the 2 most common supplementary clavicle views (20° and 45° cephalic tilt). Therefore, we selected a range of simulated radiographs that began 5° outside these angulations. Third, we measured only the degree of fracture displacement; we were unable to accurately access fracture shortening, as the 3-D fluoroscopic images were limited to the injured clavicles. A potential solution to this problem is to widen the exposure field in order to include the entire chest and allow clavicular length comparison against the uninjured side. Doing this would have been possible, but at the expense of increasing the patient’s radiation exposure.

 

 

This innovative study used 3-D fluoroscopy to capture clavicle fracture images with patients in an upright position. Unlike standard CT, in which patients are supine, this 3-D imaging technology better emulates the patient positioning used for upright radiographs, thereby avoiding potential fracture fragment alignment changes caused by shifts in body position. In addition, 3-D fluoroscopy allows us to create multiple precise simulated radiographic angulations without the magnification error of AP radiographs and, to a lesser extent, PA radiographs. Having a standing PA 15° caudal tilt radiograph obviates the need for CT with 3-D reconstruction. More fine detail may be revealed by CT with 3-D reconstruction than by a standing PA 15° caudal tilt radiograph, but the patient faces less radiation risk and cost with the radiograph.

There is no consensus as to what constitutes the standard radiographic series for clavicle fractures. Radiographic technique can vary with respect to supplemental view angulation, supine or upright patient positioning, and AP or PA radiographic views. Although our study did not address the effect of supine versus upright patient positioning on acute midshaft clavicle fracture displacement, we think that, for all clinical and research purposes, upright 15° caudal PA radiographs should be obtained for patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures.

Conclusion

Our retrospective study of 10 patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures and preoperative upright 3-D fluoroscopy scans found that a 15° angulated radiograph most often demonstrated the most fracture fragment displacement. Given these findings, we recommend obtaining an additional PA 15° caudal radiograph in the upright position for patients with midshaft clavicle fractures to best assess the extent of fracture displacement. Accurately identifying the degree of fracture displacement is important, as operative management of completely displaced fractures has been shown to improve clinical outcomes.

Clavicle fractures are common injuries, accounting for 2.6% to 5% of all adult fractures.1,2 Most clavicle fractures (69%-82%) occur in the middle third or midshaft.3,4 Midshaft clavicle fractures are often treated successfully with nonoperative means consisting of shoulder immobilization with either a sling or a figure-of-8 brace. Operative indications historically have been limited to open or impending open injuries and to patients with underlying neurovascular compromise. However, recent clinical studies have found that fractures with particular characteristics may benefit from surgical fixation. Important relative indications for open reduction and internal fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures are complete fracture fragment displacement with no cortical contact, and fractures with axial shortening of more than 20 mm.5,6

Accurately determining the extent of displacement and shortening can therefore be important in guiding treatment recommendations. The standard radiographic view for a clavicle fracture is upright or supine anteroposterior (AP). Typically, an AP radiograph with cephalic tilt of about 20° is obtained as well. On occasion, other supplemental radiographs, such as a 45° angulated view, as originally described by Quesada,7 are obtained. To our knowledge, the literature includes only 2 reports of studies that have compared different radiographic views and their accuracy in measuring fracture shortening8,9; no study has determined the best radiographic view for evaluating fracture displacement.

We conducted a study to determine which radiographic view best captures the most fracture fragment displacement. Acute midshaft clavicle fractures were assessed with simulated angled radiographs created from preoperative upright 3-dimensional (3-D) fluoroscopy scans. Our hypothesis was that a radiographic view with 20° of cephalic tilt would most often detect the most fracture displacement. In addition, we retrospectively reviewed our study patients’ initial AP injury radiographs to determine if obtaining a different view at maximum displacement would have helped identify a larger number of completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Patients and Methods

Institutional review board approval was obtained. Using our institution’s trauma registry database, we retrospectively identified 10 cases of patients who had undergone preoperative 3-D fluoroscopy for midshaft clavicle fractures. Study inclusion criteria were age 18 years or older, acute midshaft clavicle fracture, and preoperative 3-D fluoroscopy scan of clavicle available. Pediatric patients, nonacute injuries, and clavicle fractures of the lateral or medial third were excluded.

Three-dimensional fluoroscopy was used when the treating surgeon deemed it necessary for preoperative planning. All imaging was performed with a Philips MultiDiagnost Eleva 3-D fluoroscopy imager with patients in the upright standing position. (Informed patient consent was obtained.) Software bundled with the imager was used to create representative radiographs of differing angulation.

The common practice at most institutions is to obtain 2 radiographic views as part of a standard clavicle series. The additional AP angulated radiograph typically is obtained with 20° to 45° cephalic tilt from the horizontal axis. Therefore, simulated radiographs ranging from 15° to 50° of angulation in 5° increments were created, and the amount of superior displacement of the medial fragment was measured. As the simulated views were constructed from a 3-D composite image, there was none of the magnification error that occurs with AP or posteroanterior (PA) views. The stated degree of angulation mimics a radiograph’s AP cephalic tilt or PA caudal tilt (Figures 1A, 1B). For all radiographic images, displacement between fracture fragments was determined by measuring the distance between the superior cortices at the fracture site of the medial and lateral fragments. Each simulated radiograph was measured by 2 readers using standard computerized radiographic measurement tools. Final displacement was taken as the mean of the 2 measurements.

After determining which radiographic angulation demonstrated the largest number of maximally displaced fractures, we compared the simulated radiographs at that angulation with the injury AP images for all patients. Total number of patients with a completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture and no cortical contact was recorded for the 2 radiographic views.

The Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification system8 was used to classify the clavicle fractures. Statistical analysis was performed with the Fisher exact test and a regression model, using SPSS Version 19.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics).

Results

Ten patients met the study inclusion criteria. Mean age was 32.9 years (range, 18-65 years). Seven of the 10 patients were male. Six patients had right-side clavicle fractures. Of the 10 patients, 5 had the comminuted wedge fracture pattern (15-B2.3), 2 had the simple spiral pattern (15-B1.1), 2 had the spiral wedge pattern (15-B2.1), and 1 had the oblique pattern (15-B1.2).

Table 1 summarizes the fracture displacement measurements obtained with the different radiographic views. Of the 10 cases, 5 showed the most displacement with the 15° tilted view (P = .004), and the other 5 showed maximum displacement with different radiographic angulations. In addition, 6 patients showed the least displacement with the 50° angulated view (P < .001). Results of the regression analysis are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.

 

 

 

Initial horizontal AP imaging showed completely displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in 9 of the 10 patients, and 15° simulated radiographs showed completely displaced fractures in all 10 patients (P = .50).

Discussion

Our study results demonstrated that an upright 15° radiographic tilt (AP cephalad or PA caudal) identified the most fracture displacement in the most patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures. To our knowledge, this is the first study to identify the radiographic angulation that best shows the most clavicle fracture fragment displacement.

Other investigators have studied the accuracy of different radiographic views in the assessment of midshaft clavicle fractures, but they concentrated on fracture shortening. Smekal and colleagues9 used computed tomography (CT) and 3 different radiographic views to evaluate malunited midshaft clavicle fractures. Comparing the horizontal clavicular length measurements obtained with radiographs and CT scans, they determined that PA thoracic radiographs were in highest agreement with the CT scans. The results, however, were not statistically significant. In their study, supine CT was successful because the fractures were healed, and the displacement and shortening amounts were not affected by patient position. Sharr and Mohammed10 studied the accuracy of different views in the assessment of clavicle length in an articulated cadaver specimen. They obtained multiple AP and PA radiographs of different horizontal (medial, lateral) and vertical (cephalad, caudal) angulations. Actual clavicle length was then directly measured and compared with the length measured on the different views. The authors concluded that a PA 15° caudal radiograph was most accurate in assessing clavicular length. Both Smekal and colleagues9 and Sharr and Mohammed10 recommended the PA radiograph because it decreases the degree of magnification on AP radiographs by minimizing the film-to-object distance.

Our findings are important because more accurate determination of fracture displacement in patients with midshaft clavicle fractures may change clinical management. Nowak and colleagues11 investigated various patient and clavicle fracture characteristics that were predictive of a higher rate of long-term sequelae. They found that complete fracture displacement was the strongest radiographic predictor of patients’ beliefs that they were fully recovered from injury at final follow-up. The authors concluded that fractures with no bony contact should receive more “active” management. Robinson and colleagues12 studied a cohort of patients with nonoperatively managed midshaft clavicle fractures and concluded that complete fracture displacement significantly increased risk for nonunion (this risk was 2.3 times higher in patients with displaced fractures than in patients with nondisplaced fractures). Last, McKee and colleagues13 found that shoulder strength and endurance were significantly decreased in nonoperatively treated displaced midshaft clavicle fractures than in the same patients’ uninjured shoulders.

Extending the results of these studies, recent prospective randomized control trials and a meta-analysis have compared the clinical outcomes of nonoperatively and operatively managed displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.14-18 With few exceptions, these studies found improved clinical results with operative fixation. In one such study, the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society14 randomized patients with displaced midshaft clavicle fractures to either operative plate fixation or sling immobilization. The operative group was found to have improved Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores, improved Constant shoulder scores, increased patient satisfaction, faster mean time to bony fracture union, higher satisfaction with shoulder appearance, and lower rates of nonunion and malunion. Given the results of these studies, accurate identification of a displaced midshaft clavicle fracture with no cortical contact is fundamental in deciding whether to recommend operative fixation.

Retrospective review of our cohort’s initial radiographs revealed 1 case in which the patient’s completely displaced midshaft clavicle fracture would not have been diagnosed solely with an AP horizontal image. Cortical contact was seen on a standard AP clavicle radiograph (Figures 2A, 2B), and a 15° tilt radiograph created from 3-D fluoroscopy scan showed complete fracture fragment displacement (Figure 3). A change in fracture classification from partially displaced to fully displaced could alter the type of management used by a treating surgeon.

There were obvious weaknesses to this study. First, its sample size was small (10 patients). Nevertheless, we had sufficient numbers to find a statistically significant angulation. Second, a wider range of radiographic angles could have been studied. Our intent, however, was to investigate the accuracy of the 2 most common supplementary clavicle views (20° and 45° cephalic tilt). Therefore, we selected a range of simulated radiographs that began 5° outside these angulations. Third, we measured only the degree of fracture displacement; we were unable to accurately access fracture shortening, as the 3-D fluoroscopic images were limited to the injured clavicles. A potential solution to this problem is to widen the exposure field in order to include the entire chest and allow clavicular length comparison against the uninjured side. Doing this would have been possible, but at the expense of increasing the patient’s radiation exposure.

 

 

This innovative study used 3-D fluoroscopy to capture clavicle fracture images with patients in an upright position. Unlike standard CT, in which patients are supine, this 3-D imaging technology better emulates the patient positioning used for upright radiographs, thereby avoiding potential fracture fragment alignment changes caused by shifts in body position. In addition, 3-D fluoroscopy allows us to create multiple precise simulated radiographic angulations without the magnification error of AP radiographs and, to a lesser extent, PA radiographs. Having a standing PA 15° caudal tilt radiograph obviates the need for CT with 3-D reconstruction. More fine detail may be revealed by CT with 3-D reconstruction than by a standing PA 15° caudal tilt radiograph, but the patient faces less radiation risk and cost with the radiograph.

There is no consensus as to what constitutes the standard radiographic series for clavicle fractures. Radiographic technique can vary with respect to supplemental view angulation, supine or upright patient positioning, and AP or PA radiographic views. Although our study did not address the effect of supine versus upright patient positioning on acute midshaft clavicle fracture displacement, we think that, for all clinical and research purposes, upright 15° caudal PA radiographs should be obtained for patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures.

Conclusion

Our retrospective study of 10 patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures and preoperative upright 3-D fluoroscopy scans found that a 15° angulated radiograph most often demonstrated the most fracture fragment displacement. Given these findings, we recommend obtaining an additional PA 15° caudal radiograph in the upright position for patients with midshaft clavicle fractures to best assess the extent of fracture displacement. Accurately identifying the degree of fracture displacement is important, as operative management of completely displaced fractures has been shown to improve clinical outcomes.

References

1.    Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, Albo F. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(5):452-456.

2.    Nordqvist A, Petersson C. The incidence of fractures of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(300):127-132.

3.    Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult. Epidemiology and classification. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(3):476-484.

4.    Rowe CR. An atlas of anatomy and treatment of midclavicular fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;(58):29-42.

5.    Jeray KJ. Acute midshaft clavicular fracture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(4):239-248.

6.    Khan LA, Bradnock TJ, Scott C, Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(2):447-460.

7.    Quesada F. Technique for the roentgen diagnosis of fractures of the clavicle. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1926;42:424-428.

8.    Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association Classification, Database and Outcomes Committee. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21(10 suppl):S1-S133.

9.     Smekal V, Deml C, Irenberger A, et al. Length determination in midshaft clavicle fractures: validation of measurement. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22(7):458-462.

10.  Sharr JR, Mohammed KD. Optimizing the radiographic technique in clavicular fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003;12(2):170-172.

11.    Nowak J, Holgersson M, Larsson S. Can we predict long-term sequelae after fractures of the clavicle based on initial findings? A prospective study with nine to ten years of follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13(5):479-486.

12.  Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM, Wakefield AE. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicular fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(7):1359-1365.

13.  McKee MD, Pedersen EM, Jones C, et al. Deficits following nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(1):35-40.

14.  Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(1):1-10.

15.  Judd DB, Pallis MP, Smith E, Bottoni CR. Acute operative stabilization versus nonoperative management of clavicle fractures. Am J Orthop. 2009;38(7):341-345.

16.  Smekal V, Irenberger A, Struve P, Wambacher M, Krappinger D, Kralinger FS. Elastic stable intramedullary nailing versus nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures—a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(2):106-112.

17.  Witzel K. Intramedullary osteosynthesis in fractures of the mid-third of the clavicle in sports traumatology [in German]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2007;145(5):639-642.

18.  McKee RC, Whelan DB, Schemitsch EH, McKee MD. Operative versus nonoperative care of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(8):675-684.

References

1.    Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, Albo F. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(5):452-456.

2.    Nordqvist A, Petersson C. The incidence of fractures of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(300):127-132.

3.    Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult. Epidemiology and classification. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(3):476-484.

4.    Rowe CR. An atlas of anatomy and treatment of midclavicular fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;(58):29-42.

5.    Jeray KJ. Acute midshaft clavicular fracture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(4):239-248.

6.    Khan LA, Bradnock TJ, Scott C, Robinson CM. Fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(2):447-460.

7.    Quesada F. Technique for the roentgen diagnosis of fractures of the clavicle. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1926;42:424-428.

8.    Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J, et al. Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association Classification, Database and Outcomes Committee. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21(10 suppl):S1-S133.

9.     Smekal V, Deml C, Irenberger A, et al. Length determination in midshaft clavicle fractures: validation of measurement. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22(7):458-462.

10.  Sharr JR, Mohammed KD. Optimizing the radiographic technique in clavicular fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003;12(2):170-172.

11.    Nowak J, Holgersson M, Larsson S. Can we predict long-term sequelae after fractures of the clavicle based on initial findings? A prospective study with nine to ten years of follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13(5):479-486.

12.  Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM, Wakefield AE. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicular fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(7):1359-1365.

13.  McKee MD, Pedersen EM, Jones C, et al. Deficits following nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(1):35-40.

14.  Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(1):1-10.

15.  Judd DB, Pallis MP, Smith E, Bottoni CR. Acute operative stabilization versus nonoperative management of clavicle fractures. Am J Orthop. 2009;38(7):341-345.

16.  Smekal V, Irenberger A, Struve P, Wambacher M, Krappinger D, Kralinger FS. Elastic stable intramedullary nailing versus nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures—a randomized, controlled, clinical trial. J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(2):106-112.

17.  Witzel K. Intramedullary osteosynthesis in fractures of the mid-third of the clavicle in sports traumatology [in German]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2007;145(5):639-642.

18.  McKee RC, Whelan DB, Schemitsch EH, McKee MD. Operative versus nonoperative care of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(8):675-684.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Page Number
E365-E369
Page Number
E365-E369
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Using 3-Dimensional Fluoroscopy to Assess Acute Clavicle Fracture Displacement: A Radiographic Study
Display Headline
Using 3-Dimensional Fluoroscopy to Assess Acute Clavicle Fracture Displacement: A Radiographic Study
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, 3D, 3-D, 3-dimensional, fluoroscopy, clavicle, fracture, fracture management, trauma, radiograph, imaging, radiographic, radiography, scans, smith, schottel, wellman, lorich, helfet
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, 3D, 3-D, 3-dimensional, fluoroscopy, clavicle, fracture, fracture management, trauma, radiograph, imaging, radiographic, radiography, scans, smith, schottel, wellman, lorich, helfet
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Imaging Evaluation of Superior Labral Anteroposterior (SLAP) Tears

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:31
Display Headline
Imaging Evaluation of Superior Labral Anteroposterior (SLAP) Tears

Superior labral anteroposterior (SLAP) tears are common labral injuries. They occur at the attachment of the long head of the biceps tendon on the superior glenoid and extend anterior and/or posterior to the biceps anchor. The mechanism of action for SLAP tears is traction on the superior labrum by the long head of the biceps tendon, resulting in “peeling” of the labrum off the glenoid. Such forces may result from repetitive overhead arm motion (pitching) or from direct trauma.

Clinical diagnosis is challenging with SLAP tears, as they often present with nonspecific shoulder pain and may not be associated with an acute injury. A further complication is that they are often associated with other shoulder pathology, such as rotator cuff tears.1 As physical examination is typically nonspecific, proper diagnostic imaging is essential for diagnosis.

We prefer to assess potential SLAP tears with magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA).2 Dilute (1:200) gadolinium contrast material (12-15 mL) is introduced into the glenohumeral joint under sonographic or fluoroscopic guidance. Capsular distention by dilute intra-articular contrast enables superior imaging resolution of the labroligamentous complex. We think the increase in diagnostic confidence enabled by direct arthrography outweighs the additional invasiveness and cost associated with MRA relative to noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

The MRA protocol differs from our routine noncontrast shoulder imaging. We perform a fat-saturated coronal oblique T1 sequence that maximizes the conspicuity of intra-articular contrast in the plane that optimally visualizes the superior labrum. Three planes of intermediate-weighted fast spin echo not only contrast the high-signal intra-articular fluid with the low-signal fibrocartilaginous labrum and the stratified intermediate signal of glenoid articular cartilage, but they also allow optimal assessment of the rotator cuff. In addition, we perform a fat-saturated coronal T2 sequence that highlights all fluid signal structures as well as edema.

SLAP tears appear on MRA as the insinuation of intra-articular contrast between the articular cartilage and the attachment of the superior labrum,3 within the substance of the labrum, or as detachment of the labrum from the glenoid rim4 (Figure 1). Findings can range from labral fraying to complete detachment with displacement. Tears can extend into other quadrants of the labrum, extend from a Bankart lesion, or involve the biceps tendon and/or the glenohumeral ligaments (Figures 2–4). Up to 10 types of SLAP tears have been described on arthroscopy. This classification scheme, however, is seldom helpful in the interpretation of SLAP tears on MRI. More important in guiding treatment is having a detailed description of the tear, including location, extent, and morphology, along with associated abnormalities.

Several findings can aid in the diagnosis of SLAP tears. Normal anatomical variants of the anterior-superior labrum do not extend posterior to the biceps anchor—an important finding for discerning normal morphologic variants from tears. Therefore, high signal within the posterior third of the superior labrum or extension of high signal laterally within the labrum and away from the glenoid suggests a SLAP tear.5 A paralabral cyst is almost always associated with a labral tear,1 so signal abnormality of the superior labrum with a paralabral cyst suggests a SLAP tear (Figure 5).

MRA is not the only method for diagnosing SLAP tears. Standard 3-Tesla MRI had 83% sensitivity and 99% specificity for diagnosing SLAP tears in a recent study, though MRA had 98% sensitivity and 99% specificity—a statistically significant sensitivity difference.6 In another study, computed tomography arthrography (CTA) had 95% sensitivity and 88% specificity for diagnosing recurrent SLAP tears after surgery.7 CTA is associated with ionizing radiation and is limited in its assessment of other structures that may show concomitant abnormalities, such as the articular cartilage and the rotator cuff. Indirect MRA, wherein magnetic resonance sequences are obtained after intravenous injection of gadolinium contrast and exercise of the affected shoulder, had a high sensitivity of detection of labral tears of all types.8

MRA is most sensitive and specific for diagnosing SLAP tears; 3-Tesla MRI, indirect MRA, and CTA are useful alternative modalities for cases in which MRA cannot be performed.

References

1.    Chang D, Mohana-Borges A, Borso M, Chung CB. SLAP lesions: anatomy, clinical presentation, MR imaging diagnosis and characterization. Eur J Radiol. 2008;68(1):72-87.

2.    Jee WH, McCauley TR, Katz LD, Matheny JM, Ruwe PA, Daigneault JP. Superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions of the glenoid labrum: reliability and accuracy of MR arthrography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2001;218(1):127-132.

3.    Fitzpatrick D, Walz DM. Shoulder MR imaging normal variants and imaging artifacts. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2010;18(4):615-632.

4.    Bencardino JT, Beltran J, Rosenberg ZS, et al. Superior labrum anterior-posterior lesions: diagnosis with MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology. 2000;214(1):267-271.

5.    Tuite MJ, Cirillo RL, De Smet AA, Orwin JF. Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears: evaluation of three MR signs on T2-weighted images. Radiology. 2000;215(3):841-845.

6.    Magee T. 3-T MRI of the shoulder: is MR arthrography necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(1):86-92.

7.    De Filippo M, Araoz PA, Pogliacomi F, et al. Recurrent superior labral anterior-to-posterior tears after surgery: detection and grading with CT arthrography. Radiology. 2009;252(3):781-788.

8.    Fallahi F, Green N, Gadde S, Jeavons L, Armstrong P, Jonker L. Indirect magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder; a reliable diagnostic tool for investigation of suspected labral pathology. Skeletal Radiol. 2013;42(9):1225-1233.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Jeremy Grubin, MD, Alex Maderazo, MD, MBA, and Darren Fitzpatrick, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
476-477
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, imaging series, imaging, superior labral anteroposterior, SLAP, tears, injuries, magnetic resonance arthrography, MRA, grubin, maderazo, fitzpatrick
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Jeremy Grubin, MD, Alex Maderazo, MD, MBA, and Darren Fitzpatrick, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Jeremy Grubin, MD, Alex Maderazo, MD, MBA, and Darren Fitzpatrick, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Superior labral anteroposterior (SLAP) tears are common labral injuries. They occur at the attachment of the long head of the biceps tendon on the superior glenoid and extend anterior and/or posterior to the biceps anchor. The mechanism of action for SLAP tears is traction on the superior labrum by the long head of the biceps tendon, resulting in “peeling” of the labrum off the glenoid. Such forces may result from repetitive overhead arm motion (pitching) or from direct trauma.

Clinical diagnosis is challenging with SLAP tears, as they often present with nonspecific shoulder pain and may not be associated with an acute injury. A further complication is that they are often associated with other shoulder pathology, such as rotator cuff tears.1 As physical examination is typically nonspecific, proper diagnostic imaging is essential for diagnosis.

We prefer to assess potential SLAP tears with magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA).2 Dilute (1:200) gadolinium contrast material (12-15 mL) is introduced into the glenohumeral joint under sonographic or fluoroscopic guidance. Capsular distention by dilute intra-articular contrast enables superior imaging resolution of the labroligamentous complex. We think the increase in diagnostic confidence enabled by direct arthrography outweighs the additional invasiveness and cost associated with MRA relative to noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

The MRA protocol differs from our routine noncontrast shoulder imaging. We perform a fat-saturated coronal oblique T1 sequence that maximizes the conspicuity of intra-articular contrast in the plane that optimally visualizes the superior labrum. Three planes of intermediate-weighted fast spin echo not only contrast the high-signal intra-articular fluid with the low-signal fibrocartilaginous labrum and the stratified intermediate signal of glenoid articular cartilage, but they also allow optimal assessment of the rotator cuff. In addition, we perform a fat-saturated coronal T2 sequence that highlights all fluid signal structures as well as edema.

SLAP tears appear on MRA as the insinuation of intra-articular contrast between the articular cartilage and the attachment of the superior labrum,3 within the substance of the labrum, or as detachment of the labrum from the glenoid rim4 (Figure 1). Findings can range from labral fraying to complete detachment with displacement. Tears can extend into other quadrants of the labrum, extend from a Bankart lesion, or involve the biceps tendon and/or the glenohumeral ligaments (Figures 2–4). Up to 10 types of SLAP tears have been described on arthroscopy. This classification scheme, however, is seldom helpful in the interpretation of SLAP tears on MRI. More important in guiding treatment is having a detailed description of the tear, including location, extent, and morphology, along with associated abnormalities.

Several findings can aid in the diagnosis of SLAP tears. Normal anatomical variants of the anterior-superior labrum do not extend posterior to the biceps anchor—an important finding for discerning normal morphologic variants from tears. Therefore, high signal within the posterior third of the superior labrum or extension of high signal laterally within the labrum and away from the glenoid suggests a SLAP tear.5 A paralabral cyst is almost always associated with a labral tear,1 so signal abnormality of the superior labrum with a paralabral cyst suggests a SLAP tear (Figure 5).

MRA is not the only method for diagnosing SLAP tears. Standard 3-Tesla MRI had 83% sensitivity and 99% specificity for diagnosing SLAP tears in a recent study, though MRA had 98% sensitivity and 99% specificity—a statistically significant sensitivity difference.6 In another study, computed tomography arthrography (CTA) had 95% sensitivity and 88% specificity for diagnosing recurrent SLAP tears after surgery.7 CTA is associated with ionizing radiation and is limited in its assessment of other structures that may show concomitant abnormalities, such as the articular cartilage and the rotator cuff. Indirect MRA, wherein magnetic resonance sequences are obtained after intravenous injection of gadolinium contrast and exercise of the affected shoulder, had a high sensitivity of detection of labral tears of all types.8

MRA is most sensitive and specific for diagnosing SLAP tears; 3-Tesla MRI, indirect MRA, and CTA are useful alternative modalities for cases in which MRA cannot be performed.

Superior labral anteroposterior (SLAP) tears are common labral injuries. They occur at the attachment of the long head of the biceps tendon on the superior glenoid and extend anterior and/or posterior to the biceps anchor. The mechanism of action for SLAP tears is traction on the superior labrum by the long head of the biceps tendon, resulting in “peeling” of the labrum off the glenoid. Such forces may result from repetitive overhead arm motion (pitching) or from direct trauma.

Clinical diagnosis is challenging with SLAP tears, as they often present with nonspecific shoulder pain and may not be associated with an acute injury. A further complication is that they are often associated with other shoulder pathology, such as rotator cuff tears.1 As physical examination is typically nonspecific, proper diagnostic imaging is essential for diagnosis.

We prefer to assess potential SLAP tears with magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA).2 Dilute (1:200) gadolinium contrast material (12-15 mL) is introduced into the glenohumeral joint under sonographic or fluoroscopic guidance. Capsular distention by dilute intra-articular contrast enables superior imaging resolution of the labroligamentous complex. We think the increase in diagnostic confidence enabled by direct arthrography outweighs the additional invasiveness and cost associated with MRA relative to noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

The MRA protocol differs from our routine noncontrast shoulder imaging. We perform a fat-saturated coronal oblique T1 sequence that maximizes the conspicuity of intra-articular contrast in the plane that optimally visualizes the superior labrum. Three planes of intermediate-weighted fast spin echo not only contrast the high-signal intra-articular fluid with the low-signal fibrocartilaginous labrum and the stratified intermediate signal of glenoid articular cartilage, but they also allow optimal assessment of the rotator cuff. In addition, we perform a fat-saturated coronal T2 sequence that highlights all fluid signal structures as well as edema.

SLAP tears appear on MRA as the insinuation of intra-articular contrast between the articular cartilage and the attachment of the superior labrum,3 within the substance of the labrum, or as detachment of the labrum from the glenoid rim4 (Figure 1). Findings can range from labral fraying to complete detachment with displacement. Tears can extend into other quadrants of the labrum, extend from a Bankart lesion, or involve the biceps tendon and/or the glenohumeral ligaments (Figures 2–4). Up to 10 types of SLAP tears have been described on arthroscopy. This classification scheme, however, is seldom helpful in the interpretation of SLAP tears on MRI. More important in guiding treatment is having a detailed description of the tear, including location, extent, and morphology, along with associated abnormalities.

Several findings can aid in the diagnosis of SLAP tears. Normal anatomical variants of the anterior-superior labrum do not extend posterior to the biceps anchor—an important finding for discerning normal morphologic variants from tears. Therefore, high signal within the posterior third of the superior labrum or extension of high signal laterally within the labrum and away from the glenoid suggests a SLAP tear.5 A paralabral cyst is almost always associated with a labral tear,1 so signal abnormality of the superior labrum with a paralabral cyst suggests a SLAP tear (Figure 5).

MRA is not the only method for diagnosing SLAP tears. Standard 3-Tesla MRI had 83% sensitivity and 99% specificity for diagnosing SLAP tears in a recent study, though MRA had 98% sensitivity and 99% specificity—a statistically significant sensitivity difference.6 In another study, computed tomography arthrography (CTA) had 95% sensitivity and 88% specificity for diagnosing recurrent SLAP tears after surgery.7 CTA is associated with ionizing radiation and is limited in its assessment of other structures that may show concomitant abnormalities, such as the articular cartilage and the rotator cuff. Indirect MRA, wherein magnetic resonance sequences are obtained after intravenous injection of gadolinium contrast and exercise of the affected shoulder, had a high sensitivity of detection of labral tears of all types.8

MRA is most sensitive and specific for diagnosing SLAP tears; 3-Tesla MRI, indirect MRA, and CTA are useful alternative modalities for cases in which MRA cannot be performed.

References

1.    Chang D, Mohana-Borges A, Borso M, Chung CB. SLAP lesions: anatomy, clinical presentation, MR imaging diagnosis and characterization. Eur J Radiol. 2008;68(1):72-87.

2.    Jee WH, McCauley TR, Katz LD, Matheny JM, Ruwe PA, Daigneault JP. Superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions of the glenoid labrum: reliability and accuracy of MR arthrography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2001;218(1):127-132.

3.    Fitzpatrick D, Walz DM. Shoulder MR imaging normal variants and imaging artifacts. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2010;18(4):615-632.

4.    Bencardino JT, Beltran J, Rosenberg ZS, et al. Superior labrum anterior-posterior lesions: diagnosis with MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology. 2000;214(1):267-271.

5.    Tuite MJ, Cirillo RL, De Smet AA, Orwin JF. Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears: evaluation of three MR signs on T2-weighted images. Radiology. 2000;215(3):841-845.

6.    Magee T. 3-T MRI of the shoulder: is MR arthrography necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(1):86-92.

7.    De Filippo M, Araoz PA, Pogliacomi F, et al. Recurrent superior labral anterior-to-posterior tears after surgery: detection and grading with CT arthrography. Radiology. 2009;252(3):781-788.

8.    Fallahi F, Green N, Gadde S, Jeavons L, Armstrong P, Jonker L. Indirect magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder; a reliable diagnostic tool for investigation of suspected labral pathology. Skeletal Radiol. 2013;42(9):1225-1233.

References

1.    Chang D, Mohana-Borges A, Borso M, Chung CB. SLAP lesions: anatomy, clinical presentation, MR imaging diagnosis and characterization. Eur J Radiol. 2008;68(1):72-87.

2.    Jee WH, McCauley TR, Katz LD, Matheny JM, Ruwe PA, Daigneault JP. Superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions of the glenoid labrum: reliability and accuracy of MR arthrography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2001;218(1):127-132.

3.    Fitzpatrick D, Walz DM. Shoulder MR imaging normal variants and imaging artifacts. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2010;18(4):615-632.

4.    Bencardino JT, Beltran J, Rosenberg ZS, et al. Superior labrum anterior-posterior lesions: diagnosis with MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology. 2000;214(1):267-271.

5.    Tuite MJ, Cirillo RL, De Smet AA, Orwin JF. Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears: evaluation of three MR signs on T2-weighted images. Radiology. 2000;215(3):841-845.

6.    Magee T. 3-T MRI of the shoulder: is MR arthrography necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(1):86-92.

7.    De Filippo M, Araoz PA, Pogliacomi F, et al. Recurrent superior labral anterior-to-posterior tears after surgery: detection and grading with CT arthrography. Radiology. 2009;252(3):781-788.

8.    Fallahi F, Green N, Gadde S, Jeavons L, Armstrong P, Jonker L. Indirect magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder; a reliable diagnostic tool for investigation of suspected labral pathology. Skeletal Radiol. 2013;42(9):1225-1233.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(10)
Page Number
476-477
Page Number
476-477
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Imaging Evaluation of Superior Labral Anteroposterior (SLAP) Tears
Display Headline
Imaging Evaluation of Superior Labral Anteroposterior (SLAP) Tears
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, imaging series, imaging, superior labral anteroposterior, SLAP, tears, injuries, magnetic resonance arthrography, MRA, grubin, maderazo, fitzpatrick
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, imaging series, imaging, superior labral anteroposterior, SLAP, tears, injuries, magnetic resonance arthrography, MRA, grubin, maderazo, fitzpatrick
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

First MRI-compatible implantable defibrillator approved

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 07/21/2020 - 14:18
Display Headline
First MRI-compatible implantable defibrillator approved

The Food and Drug Administration approved the first MRI-compatible implantable cardioverter defibrillator on Sept. 14, starting a new era of convenience and flexibility when performing MRI scans on patients who carry this type of cardiac implant.

Eventually most, if not all, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) will have MRI compatibility, electrophysiologists predicted, a change that’s already been occurring for pacemakers following FDA approval of the first MRI-compatible pacemaker in 2011.

Dr. Rod S. Passman

“This is a major step forward and sets a new standard” for ICDs, commented Dr. Rod S. Passman, professor of medicine and electrophysiologist at Northwestern University, Chicago, who has not been involved in developing MRI-compatible ICDs. “If a patient has an ICD, they should be able to go to any community emergency room and get what could be a life-saving MRI. MRI scans of patients with ICDs should not be limited to experienced academic centers. Ultimately all [cardiac] devices will be MRI compatible,” Dr. Passman said in an interview.

“There is no downside” to the newly approved, MRI-compatible ICD, said Dr. Michael R. Gold, an electrophysiologist at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, who led the pivotal study that showed the device’s safety and efficacy during and after MRI scanning. Dr. Gold first reported results from the Evera MRI Study at the Heart Rhythm Society annual meeting in May and in a concurrently published report (J Am Soc Cardiol. 2015;65[24]:2581-8). The study enrolled 275 patients at 42 centers. Medtronic, the company that makes the newly approved ICD, plans to begin U.S. sales the week of Sept. 20, a company spokesperson said.

“I’m not sure I’d use it in all patients” who need an ICD once it’s on the market, admitted Dr. Gold. For example, some patients already have ICD leads in place that are not MRI compatible, so placing an ICD capable of MRI exposure in such patients would be moot, he noted. In other cases, the patient might best receive an ICD model made by a different manufacturer because of other device features.

“Every physician will need to choose the ICD that is best for each patient, so I don’t think we’ll see immediate, wholesale adoption [of the MRI-compatible ICD], but I expect the field will move in this direction,” Dr. Passman said.

Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Michael R. Gold

Dr. Gold agreed that, as time goes by, the ICD models sold for U.S. patients increasingly will be MRI compatible, although that might take several years to happen.

For example, the transition to pacemakers that are MRI compatible has been gradual and incomplete, even though the first of these came onto the U.S. market in 2011.

“Only two pacemaker manufacturers sell MRI-compatible devices in the United States,” noted Dr. Gold, professor of medicine and director of the division of adult cardiology at the university. Several other manufacturers produce MRI-compatible pacemakers, but so far they have not sought FDA approval for these and they only sell them outside the United States, he noted.

“Many physicians don’t think about a patient’s long-term needs [for MRI] and may instead focus on the device they are most comfortable with” or a device with other attractive features, Dr. Passman said.

The possibility of performing MRI on a patient with an ICD is not totally new. A relatively small number of sophisticated U.S. centers have been performing MRIs on patients with conventional ICDs or pacemakers for several years, especially in circumstances when the MRI was considered vitally needed. Some of these centers have participated in the MagnaSafe registry, which reported results documenting the safety and efficacy of the procedure at a cardiology meeting in 2013.

“If you take certain precautions, the risk from MRI appears to be quite low in the most experienced hands, although even in experienced hands adverse events have been reported,” said Dr. Passman. Performing an MRI on a patient with a conventional ICD or pacemaker is also a relatively labor-intensive process that requires temporarily reprogramming the device, closely monitoring the patient during the MRI scan, and then checking out the device thoroughly after the scan to make sure it is functioning correctly.

In addition to the extra labor and uncertainty about outcome, running an MRI scan on a conventional cardiac device is generally not reimbursed by insurers and creates medicolegal exposure, Dr. Gold noted. “Even though it can be done, it often is not done, and it clearly compromises patient care,” he said.

Although the Medtronic unit was the first to get FDA approval, a competitor model seems on track to also hit the U.S. market soon. Two different ICD models made by Biotronik showed safety and efficacy in a study with 153 patients (Heart Rhythm. 2015 doi. org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.06.002). Biotronik has submitted an application to the FDA to market these ICDs and associated leads as MRI compatible, and an agency decision is pending, a company spokeswoman said.

 

 

The Evera MRI Study was sponsored by Medtronic, which produces and will market the Evera ICD. Dr. Gold has been a consultant to and has received research and speaker funding from Medtronic as well as from Boston Scientific and St. Jude. Dr. Passman has received research support from Medtronic but not for work on ICDs.

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

References

Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
MRI, ICD, implantable dardioverter defibrillator, FDA, Evera, Medtronic, Biotronic, MagnaSafe
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Related Articles

The Food and Drug Administration approved the first MRI-compatible implantable cardioverter defibrillator on Sept. 14, starting a new era of convenience and flexibility when performing MRI scans on patients who carry this type of cardiac implant.

Eventually most, if not all, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) will have MRI compatibility, electrophysiologists predicted, a change that’s already been occurring for pacemakers following FDA approval of the first MRI-compatible pacemaker in 2011.

Dr. Rod S. Passman

“This is a major step forward and sets a new standard” for ICDs, commented Dr. Rod S. Passman, professor of medicine and electrophysiologist at Northwestern University, Chicago, who has not been involved in developing MRI-compatible ICDs. “If a patient has an ICD, they should be able to go to any community emergency room and get what could be a life-saving MRI. MRI scans of patients with ICDs should not be limited to experienced academic centers. Ultimately all [cardiac] devices will be MRI compatible,” Dr. Passman said in an interview.

“There is no downside” to the newly approved, MRI-compatible ICD, said Dr. Michael R. Gold, an electrophysiologist at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, who led the pivotal study that showed the device’s safety and efficacy during and after MRI scanning. Dr. Gold first reported results from the Evera MRI Study at the Heart Rhythm Society annual meeting in May and in a concurrently published report (J Am Soc Cardiol. 2015;65[24]:2581-8). The study enrolled 275 patients at 42 centers. Medtronic, the company that makes the newly approved ICD, plans to begin U.S. sales the week of Sept. 20, a company spokesperson said.

“I’m not sure I’d use it in all patients” who need an ICD once it’s on the market, admitted Dr. Gold. For example, some patients already have ICD leads in place that are not MRI compatible, so placing an ICD capable of MRI exposure in such patients would be moot, he noted. In other cases, the patient might best receive an ICD model made by a different manufacturer because of other device features.

“Every physician will need to choose the ICD that is best for each patient, so I don’t think we’ll see immediate, wholesale adoption [of the MRI-compatible ICD], but I expect the field will move in this direction,” Dr. Passman said.

Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Michael R. Gold

Dr. Gold agreed that, as time goes by, the ICD models sold for U.S. patients increasingly will be MRI compatible, although that might take several years to happen.

For example, the transition to pacemakers that are MRI compatible has been gradual and incomplete, even though the first of these came onto the U.S. market in 2011.

“Only two pacemaker manufacturers sell MRI-compatible devices in the United States,” noted Dr. Gold, professor of medicine and director of the division of adult cardiology at the university. Several other manufacturers produce MRI-compatible pacemakers, but so far they have not sought FDA approval for these and they only sell them outside the United States, he noted.

“Many physicians don’t think about a patient’s long-term needs [for MRI] and may instead focus on the device they are most comfortable with” or a device with other attractive features, Dr. Passman said.

The possibility of performing MRI on a patient with an ICD is not totally new. A relatively small number of sophisticated U.S. centers have been performing MRIs on patients with conventional ICDs or pacemakers for several years, especially in circumstances when the MRI was considered vitally needed. Some of these centers have participated in the MagnaSafe registry, which reported results documenting the safety and efficacy of the procedure at a cardiology meeting in 2013.

“If you take certain precautions, the risk from MRI appears to be quite low in the most experienced hands, although even in experienced hands adverse events have been reported,” said Dr. Passman. Performing an MRI on a patient with a conventional ICD or pacemaker is also a relatively labor-intensive process that requires temporarily reprogramming the device, closely monitoring the patient during the MRI scan, and then checking out the device thoroughly after the scan to make sure it is functioning correctly.

In addition to the extra labor and uncertainty about outcome, running an MRI scan on a conventional cardiac device is generally not reimbursed by insurers and creates medicolegal exposure, Dr. Gold noted. “Even though it can be done, it often is not done, and it clearly compromises patient care,” he said.

Although the Medtronic unit was the first to get FDA approval, a competitor model seems on track to also hit the U.S. market soon. Two different ICD models made by Biotronik showed safety and efficacy in a study with 153 patients (Heart Rhythm. 2015 doi. org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.06.002). Biotronik has submitted an application to the FDA to market these ICDs and associated leads as MRI compatible, and an agency decision is pending, a company spokeswoman said.

 

 

The Evera MRI Study was sponsored by Medtronic, which produces and will market the Evera ICD. Dr. Gold has been a consultant to and has received research and speaker funding from Medtronic as well as from Boston Scientific and St. Jude. Dr. Passman has received research support from Medtronic but not for work on ICDs.

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

The Food and Drug Administration approved the first MRI-compatible implantable cardioverter defibrillator on Sept. 14, starting a new era of convenience and flexibility when performing MRI scans on patients who carry this type of cardiac implant.

Eventually most, if not all, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) will have MRI compatibility, electrophysiologists predicted, a change that’s already been occurring for pacemakers following FDA approval of the first MRI-compatible pacemaker in 2011.

Dr. Rod S. Passman

“This is a major step forward and sets a new standard” for ICDs, commented Dr. Rod S. Passman, professor of medicine and electrophysiologist at Northwestern University, Chicago, who has not been involved in developing MRI-compatible ICDs. “If a patient has an ICD, they should be able to go to any community emergency room and get what could be a life-saving MRI. MRI scans of patients with ICDs should not be limited to experienced academic centers. Ultimately all [cardiac] devices will be MRI compatible,” Dr. Passman said in an interview.

“There is no downside” to the newly approved, MRI-compatible ICD, said Dr. Michael R. Gold, an electrophysiologist at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, who led the pivotal study that showed the device’s safety and efficacy during and after MRI scanning. Dr. Gold first reported results from the Evera MRI Study at the Heart Rhythm Society annual meeting in May and in a concurrently published report (J Am Soc Cardiol. 2015;65[24]:2581-8). The study enrolled 275 patients at 42 centers. Medtronic, the company that makes the newly approved ICD, plans to begin U.S. sales the week of Sept. 20, a company spokesperson said.

“I’m not sure I’d use it in all patients” who need an ICD once it’s on the market, admitted Dr. Gold. For example, some patients already have ICD leads in place that are not MRI compatible, so placing an ICD capable of MRI exposure in such patients would be moot, he noted. In other cases, the patient might best receive an ICD model made by a different manufacturer because of other device features.

“Every physician will need to choose the ICD that is best for each patient, so I don’t think we’ll see immediate, wholesale adoption [of the MRI-compatible ICD], but I expect the field will move in this direction,” Dr. Passman said.

Mitchel L. Zoler/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Michael R. Gold

Dr. Gold agreed that, as time goes by, the ICD models sold for U.S. patients increasingly will be MRI compatible, although that might take several years to happen.

For example, the transition to pacemakers that are MRI compatible has been gradual and incomplete, even though the first of these came onto the U.S. market in 2011.

“Only two pacemaker manufacturers sell MRI-compatible devices in the United States,” noted Dr. Gold, professor of medicine and director of the division of adult cardiology at the university. Several other manufacturers produce MRI-compatible pacemakers, but so far they have not sought FDA approval for these and they only sell them outside the United States, he noted.

“Many physicians don’t think about a patient’s long-term needs [for MRI] and may instead focus on the device they are most comfortable with” or a device with other attractive features, Dr. Passman said.

The possibility of performing MRI on a patient with an ICD is not totally new. A relatively small number of sophisticated U.S. centers have been performing MRIs on patients with conventional ICDs or pacemakers for several years, especially in circumstances when the MRI was considered vitally needed. Some of these centers have participated in the MagnaSafe registry, which reported results documenting the safety and efficacy of the procedure at a cardiology meeting in 2013.

“If you take certain precautions, the risk from MRI appears to be quite low in the most experienced hands, although even in experienced hands adverse events have been reported,” said Dr. Passman. Performing an MRI on a patient with a conventional ICD or pacemaker is also a relatively labor-intensive process that requires temporarily reprogramming the device, closely monitoring the patient during the MRI scan, and then checking out the device thoroughly after the scan to make sure it is functioning correctly.

In addition to the extra labor and uncertainty about outcome, running an MRI scan on a conventional cardiac device is generally not reimbursed by insurers and creates medicolegal exposure, Dr. Gold noted. “Even though it can be done, it often is not done, and it clearly compromises patient care,” he said.

Although the Medtronic unit was the first to get FDA approval, a competitor model seems on track to also hit the U.S. market soon. Two different ICD models made by Biotronik showed safety and efficacy in a study with 153 patients (Heart Rhythm. 2015 doi. org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.06.002). Biotronik has submitted an application to the FDA to market these ICDs and associated leads as MRI compatible, and an agency decision is pending, a company spokeswoman said.

 

 

The Evera MRI Study was sponsored by Medtronic, which produces and will market the Evera ICD. Dr. Gold has been a consultant to and has received research and speaker funding from Medtronic as well as from Boston Scientific and St. Jude. Dr. Passman has received research support from Medtronic but not for work on ICDs.

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

References

References

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
First MRI-compatible implantable defibrillator approved
Display Headline
First MRI-compatible implantable defibrillator approved
Legacy Keywords
MRI, ICD, implantable dardioverter defibrillator, FDA, Evera, Medtronic, Biotronic, MagnaSafe
Legacy Keywords
MRI, ICD, implantable dardioverter defibrillator, FDA, Evera, Medtronic, Biotronic, MagnaSafe
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Osteochondroma With Contiguous Bronchogenic Cyst of the Scapula

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:31
Display Headline
Osteochondroma With Contiguous Bronchogenic Cyst of the Scapula

Osteochondromas are common benign bone tumors composed of a bony protrusion with an overlying cartilage cap.1 This lesion constitutes 24% to 40% of all benign bone tumors, and the great majority arise from the metaphyseal region of long bones.2 The scapula accounts for only 3% to 5% of all osteochondromas; however, this lesion is the most common benign bone tumor to involve the scapula.3

In contrast, cutaneous bronchogenic cyst of the scapula is an exceedingly rare pathology. The bronchogenic cyst is a congenital cystic mass lined by tracheobronchial structures and respiratory epithelium.4 These are most commonly located in the thorax, although numerous remote locations have also been described, including cutaneous cysts.5 The overall incidence of bronchogenic cysts is thought to be 1 in 42,000 to 1 in 68,000.6 There are only 15 case reports of cutaneous bronchogenic cysts in the scapular region.7

We report the case of a novel dual lesion of both an osteochondroma and a contiguous cutaneous bronchogenic cyst in the scapula. The patient’s guardian provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

A 12-month-old boy presented to our clinic with the complaint of a mass over the left scapula. The mass was first noted incidentally several weeks earlier during bathing. Examination revealed a firm, subcutaneous, nontender mass measuring 1×2 cm located over the spine of the scapula. There were no overlying skin changes, and there was normal function of the ipsilateral upper extremity. Anteroposterior and lateral chest radiographs revealed no abnormality. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed an exostosis projecting from the scapular spine measuring 2×6×7 mm with an adjacent cystic mass measuring 5×8×9 mm that was thought to represent bursitis (Figure 1). The decision was made to observe the mass. 

The patient returned to clinic at age 31 months with a new complaint of scant drainage of serous fluid from a pinprick-sized hole located just superolateral to the scapular mass. The child’s mother reported daily manual expression of fluid from the mass via the hole, without which the mass would enlarge. There were no local or systemic signs of infection. A repeat MRI again revealed an exostosis with an adjacent cystic mass with interval enlargement of the cyst (Figure 2). At age 4.5 years, the decision was made to proceed with excision of the osteochondroma and adjacent cystic mass.

The mass was approached via a 2-cm incision designed to excise the tract to the skin. Dissection revealed a sinus tract connecting to a well-defined cystic sac. This sac was attached to the underlying exostosis. The exostosis and attached cyst were excised en bloc. The cyst was opened, revealing foul-smelling, cloudy white fluid that was sent for culture; the specimen was sent for pathology.

The fluid culture grew mixed flora, with no Staphylococcus aureus, group A streptococcus, or Pseudomonas aeruginosa identified. The pathologic examination identified bone with a cartilaginous cap, consistent with osteochondroma (Figure 3), as well as a cyst lined by respiratory epithelium with patchy areas of squamous epithelium and surrounding mucus glands, consistent with bronchogenic cyst (Figure 4). Figure 5 shows the contiguous nature of the 2 lesions.

 
 

The postoperative course was uneventful. The patient returned to full use of the left upper extremity and had resolution of all drainage. 

Discussion

Osteochondromas are thought to arise from aberrant growth of the epiphyseal growth plate cartilage. A small portion of the physis herniates past the groove of Ranvier and grows parallel to the normal physis with medullary continuity. This can occur idiopathically or, more rarely, secondary to an identified injury to the growth plate.1

The formation of bronchogenic cysts is most often attributed to anomalous budding of the ventral foregut during fetal development,4 hence the alternative designation of these cysts as foregut cysts. An extrathoracic location of the cyst has been postulated to stem from 2 possible events: a preexisting cyst may migrate out of the thorax prior to closure of the sternal plates, or sternal plate closure may itself pinch off the cyst.8,9 An alternative explanation is in situ metaplastic development of respiratory epithelium.10 When located near the skin, these cysts often drain clear fluid.11

Scapular osteochondromas are known to cause various pathologies of the shoulder girdle, including snapping scapula syndrome, chest wall deformity, shoulder impingement, and bursa formation.12-17 This case, however, is the first known finding of a scapular osteochondroma with a contiguous cutaneous bronchogenic cyst. A putative explanation for their co-occurrence is that local disturbances caused by one lesion stimulated the formation of the second. The direct connection between the bronchogenic cyst and the bone, as has been reported in 3 cases,7,9,18 seems to favor this explanation. Definitive conclusions regarding any causal relationship are beyond the scope of this single case report.

 

 

Definitive management of bronchogenic cysts is complete excision, although the diagnosis is often not made until histopathologic examination has been completed.19 Osteochondromas are managed with observation unless they are symptomatic.2 Malignant degeneration is a rare but documented occurrence in both lesions.2,20

Conclusion

In approaching the pediatric patient with a cystic mass over the scapula, a cutaneous bronchogenic cyst may be included in the differential diagnosis. This lesion can occur in isolation or can be found with another pathology, such as osteochondroma, as reported here.

References

1.    Milgram JW. The origins of osteochondromas and enchondromas. A histopathologic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;174:264-284.

2.    Dahlin DC. Osteochondroma (osteocartilaginous exostosis). In: Dahlin DC. Bone Tumors. Springfield, IL: Thomas; 1978: 17-27.

3.    Samilson RL, Morris JM, Thompson RW. Tumors of the scapula. A review of the literature and an analysis of 31 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;58:105-115.

4.    Rodgers BM, Harman PK, Johnson AM. Bronchopulmonary foregut malformations. The spectrum of anomalies. Ann Surg. 1986;203(5):517-524.

5.    Zvulunov A, Amichai B, Grunwald MH, Avinoach I, Halevy S. Cutaneous bronchogenic cyst: delineation of a poorly recognized lesion. Pediatr Dermatol. 1998;15(4):277-281.

6.    Sanli A, Onen A, Ceylan E, Yilmaz E, Silistreli E, Açikel U. A case of a bronchogenic cyst in a rare location. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(3):1093-1094.

7.    Al-Balushi Z, Ehsan MT, Al Sajee D, Al Riyami M. Scapular bronchogenic cyst: a case report and literature review. Oman Med J. 2012;27(2):161-163.

8.    Miller OF 3rd, Tyler W. Cutaneous bronchogenic cyst with papilloma and sinus presentation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11(2 Pt 2):367-371.

9.    Fraga S, Helwig EB, Rosen SH. Bronchogenic cyst in the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Am J Clin Pathol. 1971;56(2):230-238.

10. Van der Putte SC, Toonstra J. Cutaneous ‘bronchogenic’ cyst. J Cutan Pathol. 1985;12(5):404-409.

11. Schouten van der Velden AP, Severijnen RS, Wobbes T. A bronchogenic cyst under the scapula with a fistula on the back. Pediatr Surg Int. 2006;22(10):857-860.

12. Lu MT, Abboud JA. Subacromial osteochondroma. Orthopedics. 2011;34(9):581-583.

13. Lazar MA, Kwon YW, Rokito AS. Snapping scapula syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(9):2251-2262.

14. Okada K, Terada K, Sashi R, Hoshi N. Large bursa formation associated with osteochondroma of the scapula: a case report and review of the literature. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1999;29(7):356-360.

15. Tomo H, Ito Y, Aono M, Takaoka K. Chest wall deformity associated with osteochondroma of the scapula: a case report and review of the literature. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14(1):103-106.

16. Jacobi CA, Gellert K, Zieren J. Rapid development of subscapular exostosis bursata. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(2):164-166.

17. Van Riet RP, Van Glabbeek F. Arthroscopic resection of a symptomatic snapping subscapular osteochondroma. Acta Orthop Belg. 2007;73(2):252-254.

18. Das K, Jackson PB, D’Cruz AJ. Periscapular bronchogenic cyst. Indian J Pediatr. 70(2):181-182.

19. Suen HC, Mathisen DJ, Grillo HC, et al. Surgical management and radiological characteristics of bronchogenic cysts. Ann Thorac Surg. 1993;55(2):476-481.

20. Tanita M, Kikuchi-Numagami K, Ogoshi K, et al. Malignant melanoma arising from cutaneous bronchogenic cyst of the scapular area. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;46(2 suppl case reports):S19-S21.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Adam I. Edelstein, MD, Rebecca L. Linn, MD, Michael K. Fritsch, MD, PhD, and Michelle Sagan, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E355-E357
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, osteochondroma, bronchogenic, cyst, scapula, bone tumor, bone, tumor, cartilage, benign, shoulder, chest, respiratory, mass, spine, imaging, lesion, edelstein, linn, fritsch, sagan
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Adam I. Edelstein, MD, Rebecca L. Linn, MD, Michael K. Fritsch, MD, PhD, and Michelle Sagan, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Adam I. Edelstein, MD, Rebecca L. Linn, MD, Michael K. Fritsch, MD, PhD, and Michelle Sagan, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Osteochondromas are common benign bone tumors composed of a bony protrusion with an overlying cartilage cap.1 This lesion constitutes 24% to 40% of all benign bone tumors, and the great majority arise from the metaphyseal region of long bones.2 The scapula accounts for only 3% to 5% of all osteochondromas; however, this lesion is the most common benign bone tumor to involve the scapula.3

In contrast, cutaneous bronchogenic cyst of the scapula is an exceedingly rare pathology. The bronchogenic cyst is a congenital cystic mass lined by tracheobronchial structures and respiratory epithelium.4 These are most commonly located in the thorax, although numerous remote locations have also been described, including cutaneous cysts.5 The overall incidence of bronchogenic cysts is thought to be 1 in 42,000 to 1 in 68,000.6 There are only 15 case reports of cutaneous bronchogenic cysts in the scapular region.7

We report the case of a novel dual lesion of both an osteochondroma and a contiguous cutaneous bronchogenic cyst in the scapula. The patient’s guardian provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

A 12-month-old boy presented to our clinic with the complaint of a mass over the left scapula. The mass was first noted incidentally several weeks earlier during bathing. Examination revealed a firm, subcutaneous, nontender mass measuring 1×2 cm located over the spine of the scapula. There were no overlying skin changes, and there was normal function of the ipsilateral upper extremity. Anteroposterior and lateral chest radiographs revealed no abnormality. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed an exostosis projecting from the scapular spine measuring 2×6×7 mm with an adjacent cystic mass measuring 5×8×9 mm that was thought to represent bursitis (Figure 1). The decision was made to observe the mass. 

The patient returned to clinic at age 31 months with a new complaint of scant drainage of serous fluid from a pinprick-sized hole located just superolateral to the scapular mass. The child’s mother reported daily manual expression of fluid from the mass via the hole, without which the mass would enlarge. There were no local or systemic signs of infection. A repeat MRI again revealed an exostosis with an adjacent cystic mass with interval enlargement of the cyst (Figure 2). At age 4.5 years, the decision was made to proceed with excision of the osteochondroma and adjacent cystic mass.

The mass was approached via a 2-cm incision designed to excise the tract to the skin. Dissection revealed a sinus tract connecting to a well-defined cystic sac. This sac was attached to the underlying exostosis. The exostosis and attached cyst were excised en bloc. The cyst was opened, revealing foul-smelling, cloudy white fluid that was sent for culture; the specimen was sent for pathology.

The fluid culture grew mixed flora, with no Staphylococcus aureus, group A streptococcus, or Pseudomonas aeruginosa identified. The pathologic examination identified bone with a cartilaginous cap, consistent with osteochondroma (Figure 3), as well as a cyst lined by respiratory epithelium with patchy areas of squamous epithelium and surrounding mucus glands, consistent with bronchogenic cyst (Figure 4). Figure 5 shows the contiguous nature of the 2 lesions.

 
 

The postoperative course was uneventful. The patient returned to full use of the left upper extremity and had resolution of all drainage. 

Discussion

Osteochondromas are thought to arise from aberrant growth of the epiphyseal growth plate cartilage. A small portion of the physis herniates past the groove of Ranvier and grows parallel to the normal physis with medullary continuity. This can occur idiopathically or, more rarely, secondary to an identified injury to the growth plate.1

The formation of bronchogenic cysts is most often attributed to anomalous budding of the ventral foregut during fetal development,4 hence the alternative designation of these cysts as foregut cysts. An extrathoracic location of the cyst has been postulated to stem from 2 possible events: a preexisting cyst may migrate out of the thorax prior to closure of the sternal plates, or sternal plate closure may itself pinch off the cyst.8,9 An alternative explanation is in situ metaplastic development of respiratory epithelium.10 When located near the skin, these cysts often drain clear fluid.11

Scapular osteochondromas are known to cause various pathologies of the shoulder girdle, including snapping scapula syndrome, chest wall deformity, shoulder impingement, and bursa formation.12-17 This case, however, is the first known finding of a scapular osteochondroma with a contiguous cutaneous bronchogenic cyst. A putative explanation for their co-occurrence is that local disturbances caused by one lesion stimulated the formation of the second. The direct connection between the bronchogenic cyst and the bone, as has been reported in 3 cases,7,9,18 seems to favor this explanation. Definitive conclusions regarding any causal relationship are beyond the scope of this single case report.

 

 

Definitive management of bronchogenic cysts is complete excision, although the diagnosis is often not made until histopathologic examination has been completed.19 Osteochondromas are managed with observation unless they are symptomatic.2 Malignant degeneration is a rare but documented occurrence in both lesions.2,20

Conclusion

In approaching the pediatric patient with a cystic mass over the scapula, a cutaneous bronchogenic cyst may be included in the differential diagnosis. This lesion can occur in isolation or can be found with another pathology, such as osteochondroma, as reported here.

Osteochondromas are common benign bone tumors composed of a bony protrusion with an overlying cartilage cap.1 This lesion constitutes 24% to 40% of all benign bone tumors, and the great majority arise from the metaphyseal region of long bones.2 The scapula accounts for only 3% to 5% of all osteochondromas; however, this lesion is the most common benign bone tumor to involve the scapula.3

In contrast, cutaneous bronchogenic cyst of the scapula is an exceedingly rare pathology. The bronchogenic cyst is a congenital cystic mass lined by tracheobronchial structures and respiratory epithelium.4 These are most commonly located in the thorax, although numerous remote locations have also been described, including cutaneous cysts.5 The overall incidence of bronchogenic cysts is thought to be 1 in 42,000 to 1 in 68,000.6 There are only 15 case reports of cutaneous bronchogenic cysts in the scapular region.7

We report the case of a novel dual lesion of both an osteochondroma and a contiguous cutaneous bronchogenic cyst in the scapula. The patient’s guardian provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

A 12-month-old boy presented to our clinic with the complaint of a mass over the left scapula. The mass was first noted incidentally several weeks earlier during bathing. Examination revealed a firm, subcutaneous, nontender mass measuring 1×2 cm located over the spine of the scapula. There were no overlying skin changes, and there was normal function of the ipsilateral upper extremity. Anteroposterior and lateral chest radiographs revealed no abnormality. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed an exostosis projecting from the scapular spine measuring 2×6×7 mm with an adjacent cystic mass measuring 5×8×9 mm that was thought to represent bursitis (Figure 1). The decision was made to observe the mass. 

The patient returned to clinic at age 31 months with a new complaint of scant drainage of serous fluid from a pinprick-sized hole located just superolateral to the scapular mass. The child’s mother reported daily manual expression of fluid from the mass via the hole, without which the mass would enlarge. There were no local or systemic signs of infection. A repeat MRI again revealed an exostosis with an adjacent cystic mass with interval enlargement of the cyst (Figure 2). At age 4.5 years, the decision was made to proceed with excision of the osteochondroma and adjacent cystic mass.

The mass was approached via a 2-cm incision designed to excise the tract to the skin. Dissection revealed a sinus tract connecting to a well-defined cystic sac. This sac was attached to the underlying exostosis. The exostosis and attached cyst were excised en bloc. The cyst was opened, revealing foul-smelling, cloudy white fluid that was sent for culture; the specimen was sent for pathology.

The fluid culture grew mixed flora, with no Staphylococcus aureus, group A streptococcus, or Pseudomonas aeruginosa identified. The pathologic examination identified bone with a cartilaginous cap, consistent with osteochondroma (Figure 3), as well as a cyst lined by respiratory epithelium with patchy areas of squamous epithelium and surrounding mucus glands, consistent with bronchogenic cyst (Figure 4). Figure 5 shows the contiguous nature of the 2 lesions.

 
 

The postoperative course was uneventful. The patient returned to full use of the left upper extremity and had resolution of all drainage. 

Discussion

Osteochondromas are thought to arise from aberrant growth of the epiphyseal growth plate cartilage. A small portion of the physis herniates past the groove of Ranvier and grows parallel to the normal physis with medullary continuity. This can occur idiopathically or, more rarely, secondary to an identified injury to the growth plate.1

The formation of bronchogenic cysts is most often attributed to anomalous budding of the ventral foregut during fetal development,4 hence the alternative designation of these cysts as foregut cysts. An extrathoracic location of the cyst has been postulated to stem from 2 possible events: a preexisting cyst may migrate out of the thorax prior to closure of the sternal plates, or sternal plate closure may itself pinch off the cyst.8,9 An alternative explanation is in situ metaplastic development of respiratory epithelium.10 When located near the skin, these cysts often drain clear fluid.11

Scapular osteochondromas are known to cause various pathologies of the shoulder girdle, including snapping scapula syndrome, chest wall deformity, shoulder impingement, and bursa formation.12-17 This case, however, is the first known finding of a scapular osteochondroma with a contiguous cutaneous bronchogenic cyst. A putative explanation for their co-occurrence is that local disturbances caused by one lesion stimulated the formation of the second. The direct connection between the bronchogenic cyst and the bone, as has been reported in 3 cases,7,9,18 seems to favor this explanation. Definitive conclusions regarding any causal relationship are beyond the scope of this single case report.

 

 

Definitive management of bronchogenic cysts is complete excision, although the diagnosis is often not made until histopathologic examination has been completed.19 Osteochondromas are managed with observation unless they are symptomatic.2 Malignant degeneration is a rare but documented occurrence in both lesions.2,20

Conclusion

In approaching the pediatric patient with a cystic mass over the scapula, a cutaneous bronchogenic cyst may be included in the differential diagnosis. This lesion can occur in isolation or can be found with another pathology, such as osteochondroma, as reported here.

References

1.    Milgram JW. The origins of osteochondromas and enchondromas. A histopathologic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;174:264-284.

2.    Dahlin DC. Osteochondroma (osteocartilaginous exostosis). In: Dahlin DC. Bone Tumors. Springfield, IL: Thomas; 1978: 17-27.

3.    Samilson RL, Morris JM, Thompson RW. Tumors of the scapula. A review of the literature and an analysis of 31 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;58:105-115.

4.    Rodgers BM, Harman PK, Johnson AM. Bronchopulmonary foregut malformations. The spectrum of anomalies. Ann Surg. 1986;203(5):517-524.

5.    Zvulunov A, Amichai B, Grunwald MH, Avinoach I, Halevy S. Cutaneous bronchogenic cyst: delineation of a poorly recognized lesion. Pediatr Dermatol. 1998;15(4):277-281.

6.    Sanli A, Onen A, Ceylan E, Yilmaz E, Silistreli E, Açikel U. A case of a bronchogenic cyst in a rare location. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(3):1093-1094.

7.    Al-Balushi Z, Ehsan MT, Al Sajee D, Al Riyami M. Scapular bronchogenic cyst: a case report and literature review. Oman Med J. 2012;27(2):161-163.

8.    Miller OF 3rd, Tyler W. Cutaneous bronchogenic cyst with papilloma and sinus presentation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11(2 Pt 2):367-371.

9.    Fraga S, Helwig EB, Rosen SH. Bronchogenic cyst in the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Am J Clin Pathol. 1971;56(2):230-238.

10. Van der Putte SC, Toonstra J. Cutaneous ‘bronchogenic’ cyst. J Cutan Pathol. 1985;12(5):404-409.

11. Schouten van der Velden AP, Severijnen RS, Wobbes T. A bronchogenic cyst under the scapula with a fistula on the back. Pediatr Surg Int. 2006;22(10):857-860.

12. Lu MT, Abboud JA. Subacromial osteochondroma. Orthopedics. 2011;34(9):581-583.

13. Lazar MA, Kwon YW, Rokito AS. Snapping scapula syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(9):2251-2262.

14. Okada K, Terada K, Sashi R, Hoshi N. Large bursa formation associated with osteochondroma of the scapula: a case report and review of the literature. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1999;29(7):356-360.

15. Tomo H, Ito Y, Aono M, Takaoka K. Chest wall deformity associated with osteochondroma of the scapula: a case report and review of the literature. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14(1):103-106.

16. Jacobi CA, Gellert K, Zieren J. Rapid development of subscapular exostosis bursata. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(2):164-166.

17. Van Riet RP, Van Glabbeek F. Arthroscopic resection of a symptomatic snapping subscapular osteochondroma. Acta Orthop Belg. 2007;73(2):252-254.

18. Das K, Jackson PB, D’Cruz AJ. Periscapular bronchogenic cyst. Indian J Pediatr. 70(2):181-182.

19. Suen HC, Mathisen DJ, Grillo HC, et al. Surgical management and radiological characteristics of bronchogenic cysts. Ann Thorac Surg. 1993;55(2):476-481.

20. Tanita M, Kikuchi-Numagami K, Ogoshi K, et al. Malignant melanoma arising from cutaneous bronchogenic cyst of the scapular area. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;46(2 suppl case reports):S19-S21.

References

1.    Milgram JW. The origins of osteochondromas and enchondromas. A histopathologic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;174:264-284.

2.    Dahlin DC. Osteochondroma (osteocartilaginous exostosis). In: Dahlin DC. Bone Tumors. Springfield, IL: Thomas; 1978: 17-27.

3.    Samilson RL, Morris JM, Thompson RW. Tumors of the scapula. A review of the literature and an analysis of 31 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;58:105-115.

4.    Rodgers BM, Harman PK, Johnson AM. Bronchopulmonary foregut malformations. The spectrum of anomalies. Ann Surg. 1986;203(5):517-524.

5.    Zvulunov A, Amichai B, Grunwald MH, Avinoach I, Halevy S. Cutaneous bronchogenic cyst: delineation of a poorly recognized lesion. Pediatr Dermatol. 1998;15(4):277-281.

6.    Sanli A, Onen A, Ceylan E, Yilmaz E, Silistreli E, Açikel U. A case of a bronchogenic cyst in a rare location. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(3):1093-1094.

7.    Al-Balushi Z, Ehsan MT, Al Sajee D, Al Riyami M. Scapular bronchogenic cyst: a case report and literature review. Oman Med J. 2012;27(2):161-163.

8.    Miller OF 3rd, Tyler W. Cutaneous bronchogenic cyst with papilloma and sinus presentation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11(2 Pt 2):367-371.

9.    Fraga S, Helwig EB, Rosen SH. Bronchogenic cyst in the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Am J Clin Pathol. 1971;56(2):230-238.

10. Van der Putte SC, Toonstra J. Cutaneous ‘bronchogenic’ cyst. J Cutan Pathol. 1985;12(5):404-409.

11. Schouten van der Velden AP, Severijnen RS, Wobbes T. A bronchogenic cyst under the scapula with a fistula on the back. Pediatr Surg Int. 2006;22(10):857-860.

12. Lu MT, Abboud JA. Subacromial osteochondroma. Orthopedics. 2011;34(9):581-583.

13. Lazar MA, Kwon YW, Rokito AS. Snapping scapula syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(9):2251-2262.

14. Okada K, Terada K, Sashi R, Hoshi N. Large bursa formation associated with osteochondroma of the scapula: a case report and review of the literature. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1999;29(7):356-360.

15. Tomo H, Ito Y, Aono M, Takaoka K. Chest wall deformity associated with osteochondroma of the scapula: a case report and review of the literature. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14(1):103-106.

16. Jacobi CA, Gellert K, Zieren J. Rapid development of subscapular exostosis bursata. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(2):164-166.

17. Van Riet RP, Van Glabbeek F. Arthroscopic resection of a symptomatic snapping subscapular osteochondroma. Acta Orthop Belg. 2007;73(2):252-254.

18. Das K, Jackson PB, D’Cruz AJ. Periscapular bronchogenic cyst. Indian J Pediatr. 70(2):181-182.

19. Suen HC, Mathisen DJ, Grillo HC, et al. Surgical management and radiological characteristics of bronchogenic cysts. Ann Thorac Surg. 1993;55(2):476-481.

20. Tanita M, Kikuchi-Numagami K, Ogoshi K, et al. Malignant melanoma arising from cutaneous bronchogenic cyst of the scapular area. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;46(2 suppl case reports):S19-S21.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Page Number
E355-E357
Page Number
E355-E357
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Osteochondroma With Contiguous Bronchogenic Cyst of the Scapula
Display Headline
Osteochondroma With Contiguous Bronchogenic Cyst of the Scapula
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, osteochondroma, bronchogenic, cyst, scapula, bone tumor, bone, tumor, cartilage, benign, shoulder, chest, respiratory, mass, spine, imaging, lesion, edelstein, linn, fritsch, sagan
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, osteochondroma, bronchogenic, cyst, scapula, bone tumor, bone, tumor, cartilage, benign, shoulder, chest, respiratory, mass, spine, imaging, lesion, edelstein, linn, fritsch, sagan
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

A Rare Cause of Postoperative Abdominal Pain in a Spinal Fusion Patient

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:31
Display Headline
A Rare Cause of Postoperative Abdominal Pain in a Spinal Fusion Patient

Posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is a relatively common procedure. However, intestinal obstruction is a possible complication in the case of an asthenic adolescent with weight loss after surgery. We present the case of a 12-year-old girl who underwent an uncomplicated posterior spinal fusion with instrumentation for scoliosis and who developed nausea, emesis, and abdominal pain. We also discuss the origins, epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of superior mesenteric artery syndrome (SMAS), a rare condition. The patient’s parents provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

The patient was a 12-year-old girl with juvenile idiopathic scoliosis. She was seen by a pediatric orthopedist at age 8 after her primary care physician noticed a curve in her back during her physical examination. Given her age and primary curve of 25º, magnetic resonance imaging was ordered, which was negative for syrinx, tethered cord, or bony abnormalities. An underarm thoracolumbosacral orthosis (Boston Brace) was prescribed to be worn 23 hours/day. There was inconsistent follow-up over the next 4 years, and her curve progressed to 55º (right thoracic) and 47º in the lumbar spine (Figures 1, 2). Given the magnitude of the curves, surgical intervention was recommended, because bracing would no longer be beneficial. 

The patient was healthy and appeared vibrant with no medical issues. She weighed 49 kg and her height was 162 cm (body mass index [BMI], 18.6; normal). She underwent segmental posterior spinal instrumentation, and a fusion was performed from T4 to L4 using a cobalt chrome rod. Postoperatively, there were no problems. Her diet was slowly advanced from clear liquids to regular food over 3 days. She was discharged on postoperative day 4. She had no abdominal distention, pain, or nausea. The family was instructed about pain medication (oxycodone liquid, 5 mg every 4 hours as needed) and how to prevent and treat constipation. 

Three days after discharge, her mother called to inquire about positioning because the patient was uncomfortable owing to back pain. There were no abdominal complaints, and she was taking her pain medicine every 4 hours. She was instructed to lie in a comfortable position and to ambulate several times daily. The patient took little food or fluids because of a lack of appetite and back pain. On postoperative day 8, she presented to the emergency department with complaints of generalized abdominal pain and 1 day’s emesis. The patient had not had a bowel movement postoperatively. An acute abdominal series (AAS) was obtained (Figure 3), which noted a nonobstructive bowel gas pattern, with some increased colonic fecal retention. The patient was given intravenous (IV) fluids and an IV anti-emetic, and was admitted for observation. The pediatric surgical team evaluated her and concluded her symptoms resulted from constipation. Her symptoms improved over 2 to 3 days, and she had several bowel movements on day 2 after taking polyethylene glycol, sennosides, and bisacodyl suppositories. At discharge, she was noted to be passing gas, and her abdominal examination revealed no tenderness or guarding. She had mild distention, but it had improved from the previous day. She ate breakfast and ambulated several times. She had no complaints of abdominal pain and was released home with her parents. Staff reiterated instructions regarding constipation, diet, and follow-up. Her discharge weight was 48 kg (down 1 kg) and her BMI was 17.2 (down 1.4; underweight). Her height was now 165 cm (up 3 cm). Postoperative radiographs noted stable fixation with corrected curves (Figures 4, 5).

At home, the patient ate little but continued to drink fluids. On postdischarge day 3, she developed nausea, bilious emesis, and generalized abdominal pain. She returned to the emergency department. At this point, the patient weighed 44.5 kg (down 6.6 kg since the initial surgery) and her BMI was 16.1 (down 2.5; underweight). She was admitted, and IV fluids were initiated. She had more than 1300 mL of bilious emesis. A nasogastric (NG) tube was inserted. Initial laboratory findings were unremarkable other than an increase in serum lipase of 261 U/L. Her amylase level was within normal limits. An AAS was again completed and showed a distended stomach and loop of small bowel below the liver with an air fluid level. There were also distended loops of bowel in the pelvis (Figure 6). 

A pediatric surgical consultant examined her the next morning. An upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) was obtained and showed air fluid levels in the stomach with prompt gastric emptying into a normal caliber duodenal bulb. However, with supine positioning, there was significant dilatation of the second portion of the duodenum with abrupt vertical cutoff just to the right of the spine, compatible with SMAS (Figure 7). There was reflux of contrast material into the stomach from the duodenum, with no passage of barium into the distal duodenum. After the UGI, a nasojejunal (NJ) feeding tube was placed. The tip was left at the beginning of the fourth part of the duodenum. Repeated attempts to pass the NJ feeding tube beyond the fourth part of the duodenum were unsuccessful because of massive gastric distention. The patient was taken to the operating room for placement of a Stamm gastrostomy feeding tube with insertion of a transgastric jejunal (G-J) feeding tube under fluoroscopy (Figure 5). The patient had the G-J feeding tube in place for 6 weeks to augment her enteral nutrition. As she gained weight, her duodenal emptying improved. She gradually transitioned to normal oral intake. She has done well since the G-J feeding tube was removed. 

 

 

Discussion

Von Rokitansky first described SMAS in the mid-1800s.1 The exact pathology was further defined 60 years later when vascular involvement was determined to be the definitive mechanism of obstruction.2-4 Superior mesenteric artery syndrome is caused by the superior mesenteric vessels compressing the third portion of the duodenum, resulting in an extrinsic obstruction. This syndrome is also commonly called Wilkie disease, after Dr. David Wilkie, who first published in 1927 results of a comprehensive series of 75 patients.1 The syndrome is also known as arteriomesenteric duodenal compression, aortomesenteric syndrome, chronic duodenal ileus, megaduodenum, and cast syndrome.1,4,5 The term cast syndrome was derived from events in 1878, when Willet applied a body cast to a scoliosis patient who died after what was termed “fatal vomiting.”3

Epidemiology, Incidence, and Prevalence

While not unheard of, SMAS is an uncommon disorder. There have been only 400 documented reports in the English-language literature since 1980.5-8 Studies have stated that the incidence of the affected population is less than 0.4%.5,7,9,10 However, SMAS has been reported to have a mortality rate as high as 33% because of the uncommon nature of the disease and prolonged duration between onset of symptoms and diagnosis.7,9,11,12 The incidence of SMAS is higher after surgical procedures to correct spinal deformities, with rates between 0.5% and 4.7%.10,12,13 Females are affected more frequently than males (3:2 ratio).1,9,14 One large study with 80 patients that spanned 10 years reported that female incidence was 66%, and another study with 75 patients also observed that two-thirds of the patients were women.1,7 This syndrome commonly affects patients who are tall and thin with an asthenic body habitus.1,6,11,12 Superior mesenteric artery syndrome develops more commonly in younger patients. Previous studies noted that two-thirds of patients were between ages 10 and 39 years.1,8 However, given the right set of medical conditions, it can occur in patients of any age.2,9,15,16 In young, thin patients with scoliosis, the risk of developing SMAS after spinal fusion with instrumentation increases, given their already low weight coupled with the surgical intervention at the height of their longitudinal growth spurt.1,11,12 

Other patients also at increased risk for developing SMAS include those with anorexia nervosa, psychiatric/emotional disorders, or drug addiction. It can also be found in persons on prolonged bedrest, those who have increased their activity and lost weight volitionally, or patients with illness or injuries, such as burns, trauma, or significant postoperative complications that decrease caloric intake and keep them in a supine position.2,6,17 The syndrome can be acute or chronic in its presentation.

Anatomy and Physiology

The superior mesenteric artery (SMA) comes off the right anterolateral portion of the abdominal aorta, which is just anterior to the L1 vertebra. It passes over the third part of the duodenum, generally at the L2 level (Figure 8A). The duodenum passes across the aorta at the level of the L3 vertebral body and is suspended between the aorta and the SMA by the ligament of Treitz (Figure 8B).3 The angle between the aorta and SMA (aortomesenteric angle) typically ranges from 25º to 60º with an average of 45º (Figure 8A). The distance between the aorta and SMA at the level of the duodenum is called the aortomesenteric distance, and it normally measures from 10 mm to 28 mm. Obstruction is usually observed at 2 mm to 8 mm (Figure 8C).1,3

Compression and outlet obstruction from narrowing of the SMA aortomesenteric angle can be caused by a multitude of problems.3,5,9,17 In chronic conditions, narrowing of the aorto-mesenteric angle could be the result of a shortened ligament, or a low origin of the SMA on the aorta, or a high insertion of the duodenum at the ligament of Treitz. Postoperatively, any change in anatomy caused by adhesions could result in compression as well. Most commonly, however, in those with significant weight loss, such as postoperative spinal fusion patients, there is loss of retroperitoneal fat, which normally acts as a cushion around the duodenum. This allows the SMA to move posteriorly obstructing the duodenum. Lying in a recumbent position along with weight loss also puts patients at risk after surgery.3,5,9,17 SMAS should be distinguished from other conditions that can cause duodenal obstruction, such as duodenal hematomas and congenital webs. 

Symptoms and Patient Presentation

Whether SMAS is acute or chronic, most patients with SMAS present in a similar fashion. Almost all patients with acute SMAS complain of abdominal pain, nausea, and emesis (usually bilious) that usually occur after eating. Early satiety is commonly observed, resulting from delayed gastric emptying. Abdominal pain may improve when patients lie prone and are in the knee-chest, or lateral decubitus, position. These patients frequently have upper abdominal distention because of massive retention of gastric contents.4,6,16,18,19 Most spinal fusion patients present with these symptoms 7 to 10 days after surgery.11-13

 

 

Diagnosis

Our first diagnostic tool is a comprehensive history and physical examination. Once that is complete, many radiologic tests can be used to confirm the anatomic abnormality. The first test ordered is a simple AAS, which may show a “double bubble sign” (Figure 6), indicative of duodenal obstruction.4 There are several other tests, and each facility and surgeon has a preference as to which is considered the “gold standard.” Upper gastrointestinal (GI) barium studies are the simplest and most reliable. The barium test shows foregut anatomy and, to some extent, function. In SMAS patients, one should see duodenal dilatation and failure of the contrast to flow past the third section of the duodenum, along with an abrupt termination of the barium column as the duodenum crosses the vertebrae. This is the traditional method of diagnosis. There is minimal radiation, and the cost is less than that of many other tests, but it can be uncomfortable for the patient.1-4

At some institutions, an upper GI barium study is combined with angiography, which can be used to measure aortomesenteric angle and distance.1,3 Other practitioners prefer computed tomography (CT) with 3-dimensional reconstruction, which allows for measurement of the aortomesenteric angle and distance. In 1 study, CT was found to have an extremely high sensitivity and specificity for these measurements.10 CT angiography also identifies the obstruction with increased sensitivity, but it is rarely necessary and provides more radiation exposure and increased cost.1,6,14,19 Abdominal ultrasound has been used to measure the angle of the SMA and the aortomesenteric distance. When combined with endoscopy, this offers an alternative way to diagnose SMAS and decreases radiation exposure. However, it may require sedation or anesthesia.7,15,17 Overall, 3 criteria are used to define whether a patient has SMAS: duodenal dilatation, an aortomesenteric angle that is less than 25º, and an SMA that is shown to be compressing the third part of the duodenum.5

Treatment

Conservative treatment of SMAS usually starts by removing any precipitating factors present, such as a splint or cast that was applied for scoliosis, or ending activity associated with significant weight loss. Medical management consists of IV hydration, anti-emetics, oral feeding restriction, posture therapy, and placement of an NG tube for decompression. In most cases, patients will need to have an NJ feeding tube passed distal to the site of obstruction. This provides access for enteral feeding, and patients will gradually gain weight, repleting their retroperitoneal fat stores, which pushes the SMA forward and relieves the pressure on the duodenum. Electrolyte balance should be closely monitored along with weight gain. A nutritionist is often consulted to prevent underfeeding, which can produce a slow return to weight gain, poor wound healing, and loss of lean body muscle mass; or overfeeding, which can result in hyperglycemia and respiratory failure. Once patients are stable on enteral feedings, they can begin a slow return to oral intake.2-4,7,12 Total parental nutrition may be needed in some cases, but the risks associated with IV feeding usually outweigh the benefits.4 Almost all cases of acute SMAS can be successfully treated medically if diagnosed in a timely manner and supportive treatment begins promptly.7

Surgical intervention is rarely necessary for acute SMAS, but when conservative measures fail (after a 4- to 6-week trial), or in the presence of peptic ulcer disease or pancreatitis, this may become an appropriate option. In our patient, multiple attempts at passing an NJ feeding tube were unsuccessful, and she needed an operative procedure for insertion of a G-J feeding tube.  

Further surgical intervention is usually reserved for those patients with long-standing SMAS for whom medical management has failed or other issues, such as pancreatitis, colitis, or megaduodenum, have arisen. Many operations are described in the literature. A duodenojejunostomy to bypass the site of the obstruction is one option. Another is duodenal derotation (Strong procedure) to alter the aortomesenteric angle and place the third and fourth duodenal portions to the right of the SMA. Other procedures include a Roux-en-Y duodenojejunostomy and duodenal uncrossing. A lateral duodenojejunostomy between the second portion of the duodenum and the jejunum is considered the simplest surgical technique. It achieves successful outcomes in 90% of cases.2-5,14 With regards to SMAS and scoliosis, it is extremely rare that this kind of surgical intervention would be necessary.

Conclusion

When planning operative spinal correction in scoliosis patients (especially females) who have a low BMI at the time of surgery and who have increased thoracic stiffness, be alert for signs and symptoms of SMAS. This rare complication can develop, and timely diagnosis and medical management will decrease morbidity and shorten the length of time needed for nutritional rehabilitation.

References

1.    Lee TH, Lee JS, Jo Y, et al. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: where do we stand today? J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(12):2203-2211.

2.    Chan DK, Mak KS, Cheah YL. Successful nutritional therapy for superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Singapore Med J. 2012;53(11):e233-e236.

3.    Beltrán OD, Martinez AV, Manrique Mdel C, Rodriguez JS, Febres EL, Peña SR. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in a patient with Charcot Marie Tooth disease. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;3(12):197-200.

4.    Verhoef PA, Rampal A. Unique challenges for appropriate management of a 16-year-old girl with superior mesenteric artery syndrome as a result of anorexia nervosa: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2009;3:127.

5.    Kingham TP, Shen R, Ren C. Laparoscopic treatment of superior mesenteric artery syndrome. JSLS. 2004;8(4):376-379.

6.    Schauer SG, Thompson AJ, Bebarta VS. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in a young military basic trainee. Mil Med. 2013;178(3):e398-e399.

7.    Karrer FM, Jones SA, Vargas JH. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Treatment and management. Medscape. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/932220. Updated July 27, 2015. Accessed August 3, 2015.

8.    Arthurs OJ, Mehta U, Set PA. Nutcracker and SMA syndromes: What is the normal SMA angle in children? Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(8):e854-e861.

9.    Capitano S, Donatelli G, Boccoli G. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome--Believe in it! Report of a case. Case Rep Surg. 2012;2012(10):282646.

10.  Sabbagh C, Santin E, Potier A, Regimbeau JM. The superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a rare etiology for proximal obstructive syndrome. J Visc Surg. 2012;149(6):428-429.

11.  Shah MA, Albright MB, Vogt MT, Moreland MS. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in scoliosis surgery: weight percentile for height as an indicator of risk. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003;23(5):665-668.

12.  Tsirikos AI, Anakwe RE, Baker AD. Late presentation of superior mesenteric artery syndrome following scoliosis surgery: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2008;2(9):9.

13.  Hod-Feins R, Copeliovitch L, Abu-Kishk I, et al. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome after scoliosis repair surgery: a case study and reassessment of the syndrome’s pathogenesis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2007;16(5):345-349.

14.  Kennedy KV, Yela R, Achalandabaso Mdel M, Martín-Pérez E. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2013;105(4):236-238.

15.  Agrawal S, Patel H. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Surgery. 2013;153(4):601-602.

16.  Felton BM, White JM, Racine MA. An uncommon case of abdominal pain: superior mesenteric artery syndrome. West J Emerg Med. 2012;13(6):501-502.

17.  Kothari TH, Machnicki S, Kurtz L. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011;25(11):599-600.

18.  Bauer S, Karplus R, Belsky V, Mha HA. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a forgotten entity. Isr Med Assoc J. 2013;15(4):189-191.

19.  Ricca RL, Kasten J, Javid PJ. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome after minimally invasive correction of pectus excavatum: impact of post-operative weight loss. J Pediatr Surg. 2012;47(11):2137-2139.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Pamela L. Horn, MS, CNP, RNFA, ONP-C, Allan C. Beebe, MD, and Denis R. King, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E350-E354
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, abdominal, pain, spinal fusion, spine, stomach, nausea, esmesis, bowel, deformity, feeding tube, surgery, spinal, nutrition, adolescent, superior mesenteric artery syndrome, SMAS, horn, beebe, king
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Pamela L. Horn, MS, CNP, RNFA, ONP-C, Allan C. Beebe, MD, and Denis R. King, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Pamela L. Horn, MS, CNP, RNFA, ONP-C, Allan C. Beebe, MD, and Denis R. King, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is a relatively common procedure. However, intestinal obstruction is a possible complication in the case of an asthenic adolescent with weight loss after surgery. We present the case of a 12-year-old girl who underwent an uncomplicated posterior spinal fusion with instrumentation for scoliosis and who developed nausea, emesis, and abdominal pain. We also discuss the origins, epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of superior mesenteric artery syndrome (SMAS), a rare condition. The patient’s parents provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

The patient was a 12-year-old girl with juvenile idiopathic scoliosis. She was seen by a pediatric orthopedist at age 8 after her primary care physician noticed a curve in her back during her physical examination. Given her age and primary curve of 25º, magnetic resonance imaging was ordered, which was negative for syrinx, tethered cord, or bony abnormalities. An underarm thoracolumbosacral orthosis (Boston Brace) was prescribed to be worn 23 hours/day. There was inconsistent follow-up over the next 4 years, and her curve progressed to 55º (right thoracic) and 47º in the lumbar spine (Figures 1, 2). Given the magnitude of the curves, surgical intervention was recommended, because bracing would no longer be beneficial. 

The patient was healthy and appeared vibrant with no medical issues. She weighed 49 kg and her height was 162 cm (body mass index [BMI], 18.6; normal). She underwent segmental posterior spinal instrumentation, and a fusion was performed from T4 to L4 using a cobalt chrome rod. Postoperatively, there were no problems. Her diet was slowly advanced from clear liquids to regular food over 3 days. She was discharged on postoperative day 4. She had no abdominal distention, pain, or nausea. The family was instructed about pain medication (oxycodone liquid, 5 mg every 4 hours as needed) and how to prevent and treat constipation. 

Three days after discharge, her mother called to inquire about positioning because the patient was uncomfortable owing to back pain. There were no abdominal complaints, and she was taking her pain medicine every 4 hours. She was instructed to lie in a comfortable position and to ambulate several times daily. The patient took little food or fluids because of a lack of appetite and back pain. On postoperative day 8, she presented to the emergency department with complaints of generalized abdominal pain and 1 day’s emesis. The patient had not had a bowel movement postoperatively. An acute abdominal series (AAS) was obtained (Figure 3), which noted a nonobstructive bowel gas pattern, with some increased colonic fecal retention. The patient was given intravenous (IV) fluids and an IV anti-emetic, and was admitted for observation. The pediatric surgical team evaluated her and concluded her symptoms resulted from constipation. Her symptoms improved over 2 to 3 days, and she had several bowel movements on day 2 after taking polyethylene glycol, sennosides, and bisacodyl suppositories. At discharge, she was noted to be passing gas, and her abdominal examination revealed no tenderness or guarding. She had mild distention, but it had improved from the previous day. She ate breakfast and ambulated several times. She had no complaints of abdominal pain and was released home with her parents. Staff reiterated instructions regarding constipation, diet, and follow-up. Her discharge weight was 48 kg (down 1 kg) and her BMI was 17.2 (down 1.4; underweight). Her height was now 165 cm (up 3 cm). Postoperative radiographs noted stable fixation with corrected curves (Figures 4, 5).

At home, the patient ate little but continued to drink fluids. On postdischarge day 3, she developed nausea, bilious emesis, and generalized abdominal pain. She returned to the emergency department. At this point, the patient weighed 44.5 kg (down 6.6 kg since the initial surgery) and her BMI was 16.1 (down 2.5; underweight). She was admitted, and IV fluids were initiated. She had more than 1300 mL of bilious emesis. A nasogastric (NG) tube was inserted. Initial laboratory findings were unremarkable other than an increase in serum lipase of 261 U/L. Her amylase level was within normal limits. An AAS was again completed and showed a distended stomach and loop of small bowel below the liver with an air fluid level. There were also distended loops of bowel in the pelvis (Figure 6). 

A pediatric surgical consultant examined her the next morning. An upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) was obtained and showed air fluid levels in the stomach with prompt gastric emptying into a normal caliber duodenal bulb. However, with supine positioning, there was significant dilatation of the second portion of the duodenum with abrupt vertical cutoff just to the right of the spine, compatible with SMAS (Figure 7). There was reflux of contrast material into the stomach from the duodenum, with no passage of barium into the distal duodenum. After the UGI, a nasojejunal (NJ) feeding tube was placed. The tip was left at the beginning of the fourth part of the duodenum. Repeated attempts to pass the NJ feeding tube beyond the fourth part of the duodenum were unsuccessful because of massive gastric distention. The patient was taken to the operating room for placement of a Stamm gastrostomy feeding tube with insertion of a transgastric jejunal (G-J) feeding tube under fluoroscopy (Figure 5). The patient had the G-J feeding tube in place for 6 weeks to augment her enteral nutrition. As she gained weight, her duodenal emptying improved. She gradually transitioned to normal oral intake. She has done well since the G-J feeding tube was removed. 

 

 

Discussion

Von Rokitansky first described SMAS in the mid-1800s.1 The exact pathology was further defined 60 years later when vascular involvement was determined to be the definitive mechanism of obstruction.2-4 Superior mesenteric artery syndrome is caused by the superior mesenteric vessels compressing the third portion of the duodenum, resulting in an extrinsic obstruction. This syndrome is also commonly called Wilkie disease, after Dr. David Wilkie, who first published in 1927 results of a comprehensive series of 75 patients.1 The syndrome is also known as arteriomesenteric duodenal compression, aortomesenteric syndrome, chronic duodenal ileus, megaduodenum, and cast syndrome.1,4,5 The term cast syndrome was derived from events in 1878, when Willet applied a body cast to a scoliosis patient who died after what was termed “fatal vomiting.”3

Epidemiology, Incidence, and Prevalence

While not unheard of, SMAS is an uncommon disorder. There have been only 400 documented reports in the English-language literature since 1980.5-8 Studies have stated that the incidence of the affected population is less than 0.4%.5,7,9,10 However, SMAS has been reported to have a mortality rate as high as 33% because of the uncommon nature of the disease and prolonged duration between onset of symptoms and diagnosis.7,9,11,12 The incidence of SMAS is higher after surgical procedures to correct spinal deformities, with rates between 0.5% and 4.7%.10,12,13 Females are affected more frequently than males (3:2 ratio).1,9,14 One large study with 80 patients that spanned 10 years reported that female incidence was 66%, and another study with 75 patients also observed that two-thirds of the patients were women.1,7 This syndrome commonly affects patients who are tall and thin with an asthenic body habitus.1,6,11,12 Superior mesenteric artery syndrome develops more commonly in younger patients. Previous studies noted that two-thirds of patients were between ages 10 and 39 years.1,8 However, given the right set of medical conditions, it can occur in patients of any age.2,9,15,16 In young, thin patients with scoliosis, the risk of developing SMAS after spinal fusion with instrumentation increases, given their already low weight coupled with the surgical intervention at the height of their longitudinal growth spurt.1,11,12 

Other patients also at increased risk for developing SMAS include those with anorexia nervosa, psychiatric/emotional disorders, or drug addiction. It can also be found in persons on prolonged bedrest, those who have increased their activity and lost weight volitionally, or patients with illness or injuries, such as burns, trauma, or significant postoperative complications that decrease caloric intake and keep them in a supine position.2,6,17 The syndrome can be acute or chronic in its presentation.

Anatomy and Physiology

The superior mesenteric artery (SMA) comes off the right anterolateral portion of the abdominal aorta, which is just anterior to the L1 vertebra. It passes over the third part of the duodenum, generally at the L2 level (Figure 8A). The duodenum passes across the aorta at the level of the L3 vertebral body and is suspended between the aorta and the SMA by the ligament of Treitz (Figure 8B).3 The angle between the aorta and SMA (aortomesenteric angle) typically ranges from 25º to 60º with an average of 45º (Figure 8A). The distance between the aorta and SMA at the level of the duodenum is called the aortomesenteric distance, and it normally measures from 10 mm to 28 mm. Obstruction is usually observed at 2 mm to 8 mm (Figure 8C).1,3

Compression and outlet obstruction from narrowing of the SMA aortomesenteric angle can be caused by a multitude of problems.3,5,9,17 In chronic conditions, narrowing of the aorto-mesenteric angle could be the result of a shortened ligament, or a low origin of the SMA on the aorta, or a high insertion of the duodenum at the ligament of Treitz. Postoperatively, any change in anatomy caused by adhesions could result in compression as well. Most commonly, however, in those with significant weight loss, such as postoperative spinal fusion patients, there is loss of retroperitoneal fat, which normally acts as a cushion around the duodenum. This allows the SMA to move posteriorly obstructing the duodenum. Lying in a recumbent position along with weight loss also puts patients at risk after surgery.3,5,9,17 SMAS should be distinguished from other conditions that can cause duodenal obstruction, such as duodenal hematomas and congenital webs. 

Symptoms and Patient Presentation

Whether SMAS is acute or chronic, most patients with SMAS present in a similar fashion. Almost all patients with acute SMAS complain of abdominal pain, nausea, and emesis (usually bilious) that usually occur after eating. Early satiety is commonly observed, resulting from delayed gastric emptying. Abdominal pain may improve when patients lie prone and are in the knee-chest, or lateral decubitus, position. These patients frequently have upper abdominal distention because of massive retention of gastric contents.4,6,16,18,19 Most spinal fusion patients present with these symptoms 7 to 10 days after surgery.11-13

 

 

Diagnosis

Our first diagnostic tool is a comprehensive history and physical examination. Once that is complete, many radiologic tests can be used to confirm the anatomic abnormality. The first test ordered is a simple AAS, which may show a “double bubble sign” (Figure 6), indicative of duodenal obstruction.4 There are several other tests, and each facility and surgeon has a preference as to which is considered the “gold standard.” Upper gastrointestinal (GI) barium studies are the simplest and most reliable. The barium test shows foregut anatomy and, to some extent, function. In SMAS patients, one should see duodenal dilatation and failure of the contrast to flow past the third section of the duodenum, along with an abrupt termination of the barium column as the duodenum crosses the vertebrae. This is the traditional method of diagnosis. There is minimal radiation, and the cost is less than that of many other tests, but it can be uncomfortable for the patient.1-4

At some institutions, an upper GI barium study is combined with angiography, which can be used to measure aortomesenteric angle and distance.1,3 Other practitioners prefer computed tomography (CT) with 3-dimensional reconstruction, which allows for measurement of the aortomesenteric angle and distance. In 1 study, CT was found to have an extremely high sensitivity and specificity for these measurements.10 CT angiography also identifies the obstruction with increased sensitivity, but it is rarely necessary and provides more radiation exposure and increased cost.1,6,14,19 Abdominal ultrasound has been used to measure the angle of the SMA and the aortomesenteric distance. When combined with endoscopy, this offers an alternative way to diagnose SMAS and decreases radiation exposure. However, it may require sedation or anesthesia.7,15,17 Overall, 3 criteria are used to define whether a patient has SMAS: duodenal dilatation, an aortomesenteric angle that is less than 25º, and an SMA that is shown to be compressing the third part of the duodenum.5

Treatment

Conservative treatment of SMAS usually starts by removing any precipitating factors present, such as a splint or cast that was applied for scoliosis, or ending activity associated with significant weight loss. Medical management consists of IV hydration, anti-emetics, oral feeding restriction, posture therapy, and placement of an NG tube for decompression. In most cases, patients will need to have an NJ feeding tube passed distal to the site of obstruction. This provides access for enteral feeding, and patients will gradually gain weight, repleting their retroperitoneal fat stores, which pushes the SMA forward and relieves the pressure on the duodenum. Electrolyte balance should be closely monitored along with weight gain. A nutritionist is often consulted to prevent underfeeding, which can produce a slow return to weight gain, poor wound healing, and loss of lean body muscle mass; or overfeeding, which can result in hyperglycemia and respiratory failure. Once patients are stable on enteral feedings, they can begin a slow return to oral intake.2-4,7,12 Total parental nutrition may be needed in some cases, but the risks associated with IV feeding usually outweigh the benefits.4 Almost all cases of acute SMAS can be successfully treated medically if diagnosed in a timely manner and supportive treatment begins promptly.7

Surgical intervention is rarely necessary for acute SMAS, but when conservative measures fail (after a 4- to 6-week trial), or in the presence of peptic ulcer disease or pancreatitis, this may become an appropriate option. In our patient, multiple attempts at passing an NJ feeding tube were unsuccessful, and she needed an operative procedure for insertion of a G-J feeding tube.  

Further surgical intervention is usually reserved for those patients with long-standing SMAS for whom medical management has failed or other issues, such as pancreatitis, colitis, or megaduodenum, have arisen. Many operations are described in the literature. A duodenojejunostomy to bypass the site of the obstruction is one option. Another is duodenal derotation (Strong procedure) to alter the aortomesenteric angle and place the third and fourth duodenal portions to the right of the SMA. Other procedures include a Roux-en-Y duodenojejunostomy and duodenal uncrossing. A lateral duodenojejunostomy between the second portion of the duodenum and the jejunum is considered the simplest surgical technique. It achieves successful outcomes in 90% of cases.2-5,14 With regards to SMAS and scoliosis, it is extremely rare that this kind of surgical intervention would be necessary.

Conclusion

When planning operative spinal correction in scoliosis patients (especially females) who have a low BMI at the time of surgery and who have increased thoracic stiffness, be alert for signs and symptoms of SMAS. This rare complication can develop, and timely diagnosis and medical management will decrease morbidity and shorten the length of time needed for nutritional rehabilitation.

Posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is a relatively common procedure. However, intestinal obstruction is a possible complication in the case of an asthenic adolescent with weight loss after surgery. We present the case of a 12-year-old girl who underwent an uncomplicated posterior spinal fusion with instrumentation for scoliosis and who developed nausea, emesis, and abdominal pain. We also discuss the origins, epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of superior mesenteric artery syndrome (SMAS), a rare condition. The patient’s parents provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

The patient was a 12-year-old girl with juvenile idiopathic scoliosis. She was seen by a pediatric orthopedist at age 8 after her primary care physician noticed a curve in her back during her physical examination. Given her age and primary curve of 25º, magnetic resonance imaging was ordered, which was negative for syrinx, tethered cord, or bony abnormalities. An underarm thoracolumbosacral orthosis (Boston Brace) was prescribed to be worn 23 hours/day. There was inconsistent follow-up over the next 4 years, and her curve progressed to 55º (right thoracic) and 47º in the lumbar spine (Figures 1, 2). Given the magnitude of the curves, surgical intervention was recommended, because bracing would no longer be beneficial. 

The patient was healthy and appeared vibrant with no medical issues. She weighed 49 kg and her height was 162 cm (body mass index [BMI], 18.6; normal). She underwent segmental posterior spinal instrumentation, and a fusion was performed from T4 to L4 using a cobalt chrome rod. Postoperatively, there were no problems. Her diet was slowly advanced from clear liquids to regular food over 3 days. She was discharged on postoperative day 4. She had no abdominal distention, pain, or nausea. The family was instructed about pain medication (oxycodone liquid, 5 mg every 4 hours as needed) and how to prevent and treat constipation. 

Three days after discharge, her mother called to inquire about positioning because the patient was uncomfortable owing to back pain. There were no abdominal complaints, and she was taking her pain medicine every 4 hours. She was instructed to lie in a comfortable position and to ambulate several times daily. The patient took little food or fluids because of a lack of appetite and back pain. On postoperative day 8, she presented to the emergency department with complaints of generalized abdominal pain and 1 day’s emesis. The patient had not had a bowel movement postoperatively. An acute abdominal series (AAS) was obtained (Figure 3), which noted a nonobstructive bowel gas pattern, with some increased colonic fecal retention. The patient was given intravenous (IV) fluids and an IV anti-emetic, and was admitted for observation. The pediatric surgical team evaluated her and concluded her symptoms resulted from constipation. Her symptoms improved over 2 to 3 days, and she had several bowel movements on day 2 after taking polyethylene glycol, sennosides, and bisacodyl suppositories. At discharge, she was noted to be passing gas, and her abdominal examination revealed no tenderness or guarding. She had mild distention, but it had improved from the previous day. She ate breakfast and ambulated several times. She had no complaints of abdominal pain and was released home with her parents. Staff reiterated instructions regarding constipation, diet, and follow-up. Her discharge weight was 48 kg (down 1 kg) and her BMI was 17.2 (down 1.4; underweight). Her height was now 165 cm (up 3 cm). Postoperative radiographs noted stable fixation with corrected curves (Figures 4, 5).

At home, the patient ate little but continued to drink fluids. On postdischarge day 3, she developed nausea, bilious emesis, and generalized abdominal pain. She returned to the emergency department. At this point, the patient weighed 44.5 kg (down 6.6 kg since the initial surgery) and her BMI was 16.1 (down 2.5; underweight). She was admitted, and IV fluids were initiated. She had more than 1300 mL of bilious emesis. A nasogastric (NG) tube was inserted. Initial laboratory findings were unremarkable other than an increase in serum lipase of 261 U/L. Her amylase level was within normal limits. An AAS was again completed and showed a distended stomach and loop of small bowel below the liver with an air fluid level. There were also distended loops of bowel in the pelvis (Figure 6). 

A pediatric surgical consultant examined her the next morning. An upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) was obtained and showed air fluid levels in the stomach with prompt gastric emptying into a normal caliber duodenal bulb. However, with supine positioning, there was significant dilatation of the second portion of the duodenum with abrupt vertical cutoff just to the right of the spine, compatible with SMAS (Figure 7). There was reflux of contrast material into the stomach from the duodenum, with no passage of barium into the distal duodenum. After the UGI, a nasojejunal (NJ) feeding tube was placed. The tip was left at the beginning of the fourth part of the duodenum. Repeated attempts to pass the NJ feeding tube beyond the fourth part of the duodenum were unsuccessful because of massive gastric distention. The patient was taken to the operating room for placement of a Stamm gastrostomy feeding tube with insertion of a transgastric jejunal (G-J) feeding tube under fluoroscopy (Figure 5). The patient had the G-J feeding tube in place for 6 weeks to augment her enteral nutrition. As she gained weight, her duodenal emptying improved. She gradually transitioned to normal oral intake. She has done well since the G-J feeding tube was removed. 

 

 

Discussion

Von Rokitansky first described SMAS in the mid-1800s.1 The exact pathology was further defined 60 years later when vascular involvement was determined to be the definitive mechanism of obstruction.2-4 Superior mesenteric artery syndrome is caused by the superior mesenteric vessels compressing the third portion of the duodenum, resulting in an extrinsic obstruction. This syndrome is also commonly called Wilkie disease, after Dr. David Wilkie, who first published in 1927 results of a comprehensive series of 75 patients.1 The syndrome is also known as arteriomesenteric duodenal compression, aortomesenteric syndrome, chronic duodenal ileus, megaduodenum, and cast syndrome.1,4,5 The term cast syndrome was derived from events in 1878, when Willet applied a body cast to a scoliosis patient who died after what was termed “fatal vomiting.”3

Epidemiology, Incidence, and Prevalence

While not unheard of, SMAS is an uncommon disorder. There have been only 400 documented reports in the English-language literature since 1980.5-8 Studies have stated that the incidence of the affected population is less than 0.4%.5,7,9,10 However, SMAS has been reported to have a mortality rate as high as 33% because of the uncommon nature of the disease and prolonged duration between onset of symptoms and diagnosis.7,9,11,12 The incidence of SMAS is higher after surgical procedures to correct spinal deformities, with rates between 0.5% and 4.7%.10,12,13 Females are affected more frequently than males (3:2 ratio).1,9,14 One large study with 80 patients that spanned 10 years reported that female incidence was 66%, and another study with 75 patients also observed that two-thirds of the patients were women.1,7 This syndrome commonly affects patients who are tall and thin with an asthenic body habitus.1,6,11,12 Superior mesenteric artery syndrome develops more commonly in younger patients. Previous studies noted that two-thirds of patients were between ages 10 and 39 years.1,8 However, given the right set of medical conditions, it can occur in patients of any age.2,9,15,16 In young, thin patients with scoliosis, the risk of developing SMAS after spinal fusion with instrumentation increases, given their already low weight coupled with the surgical intervention at the height of their longitudinal growth spurt.1,11,12 

Other patients also at increased risk for developing SMAS include those with anorexia nervosa, psychiatric/emotional disorders, or drug addiction. It can also be found in persons on prolonged bedrest, those who have increased their activity and lost weight volitionally, or patients with illness or injuries, such as burns, trauma, or significant postoperative complications that decrease caloric intake and keep them in a supine position.2,6,17 The syndrome can be acute or chronic in its presentation.

Anatomy and Physiology

The superior mesenteric artery (SMA) comes off the right anterolateral portion of the abdominal aorta, which is just anterior to the L1 vertebra. It passes over the third part of the duodenum, generally at the L2 level (Figure 8A). The duodenum passes across the aorta at the level of the L3 vertebral body and is suspended between the aorta and the SMA by the ligament of Treitz (Figure 8B).3 The angle between the aorta and SMA (aortomesenteric angle) typically ranges from 25º to 60º with an average of 45º (Figure 8A). The distance between the aorta and SMA at the level of the duodenum is called the aortomesenteric distance, and it normally measures from 10 mm to 28 mm. Obstruction is usually observed at 2 mm to 8 mm (Figure 8C).1,3

Compression and outlet obstruction from narrowing of the SMA aortomesenteric angle can be caused by a multitude of problems.3,5,9,17 In chronic conditions, narrowing of the aorto-mesenteric angle could be the result of a shortened ligament, or a low origin of the SMA on the aorta, or a high insertion of the duodenum at the ligament of Treitz. Postoperatively, any change in anatomy caused by adhesions could result in compression as well. Most commonly, however, in those with significant weight loss, such as postoperative spinal fusion patients, there is loss of retroperitoneal fat, which normally acts as a cushion around the duodenum. This allows the SMA to move posteriorly obstructing the duodenum. Lying in a recumbent position along with weight loss also puts patients at risk after surgery.3,5,9,17 SMAS should be distinguished from other conditions that can cause duodenal obstruction, such as duodenal hematomas and congenital webs. 

Symptoms and Patient Presentation

Whether SMAS is acute or chronic, most patients with SMAS present in a similar fashion. Almost all patients with acute SMAS complain of abdominal pain, nausea, and emesis (usually bilious) that usually occur after eating. Early satiety is commonly observed, resulting from delayed gastric emptying. Abdominal pain may improve when patients lie prone and are in the knee-chest, or lateral decubitus, position. These patients frequently have upper abdominal distention because of massive retention of gastric contents.4,6,16,18,19 Most spinal fusion patients present with these symptoms 7 to 10 days after surgery.11-13

 

 

Diagnosis

Our first diagnostic tool is a comprehensive history and physical examination. Once that is complete, many radiologic tests can be used to confirm the anatomic abnormality. The first test ordered is a simple AAS, which may show a “double bubble sign” (Figure 6), indicative of duodenal obstruction.4 There are several other tests, and each facility and surgeon has a preference as to which is considered the “gold standard.” Upper gastrointestinal (GI) barium studies are the simplest and most reliable. The barium test shows foregut anatomy and, to some extent, function. In SMAS patients, one should see duodenal dilatation and failure of the contrast to flow past the third section of the duodenum, along with an abrupt termination of the barium column as the duodenum crosses the vertebrae. This is the traditional method of diagnosis. There is minimal radiation, and the cost is less than that of many other tests, but it can be uncomfortable for the patient.1-4

At some institutions, an upper GI barium study is combined with angiography, which can be used to measure aortomesenteric angle and distance.1,3 Other practitioners prefer computed tomography (CT) with 3-dimensional reconstruction, which allows for measurement of the aortomesenteric angle and distance. In 1 study, CT was found to have an extremely high sensitivity and specificity for these measurements.10 CT angiography also identifies the obstruction with increased sensitivity, but it is rarely necessary and provides more radiation exposure and increased cost.1,6,14,19 Abdominal ultrasound has been used to measure the angle of the SMA and the aortomesenteric distance. When combined with endoscopy, this offers an alternative way to diagnose SMAS and decreases radiation exposure. However, it may require sedation or anesthesia.7,15,17 Overall, 3 criteria are used to define whether a patient has SMAS: duodenal dilatation, an aortomesenteric angle that is less than 25º, and an SMA that is shown to be compressing the third part of the duodenum.5

Treatment

Conservative treatment of SMAS usually starts by removing any precipitating factors present, such as a splint or cast that was applied for scoliosis, or ending activity associated with significant weight loss. Medical management consists of IV hydration, anti-emetics, oral feeding restriction, posture therapy, and placement of an NG tube for decompression. In most cases, patients will need to have an NJ feeding tube passed distal to the site of obstruction. This provides access for enteral feeding, and patients will gradually gain weight, repleting their retroperitoneal fat stores, which pushes the SMA forward and relieves the pressure on the duodenum. Electrolyte balance should be closely monitored along with weight gain. A nutritionist is often consulted to prevent underfeeding, which can produce a slow return to weight gain, poor wound healing, and loss of lean body muscle mass; or overfeeding, which can result in hyperglycemia and respiratory failure. Once patients are stable on enteral feedings, they can begin a slow return to oral intake.2-4,7,12 Total parental nutrition may be needed in some cases, but the risks associated with IV feeding usually outweigh the benefits.4 Almost all cases of acute SMAS can be successfully treated medically if diagnosed in a timely manner and supportive treatment begins promptly.7

Surgical intervention is rarely necessary for acute SMAS, but when conservative measures fail (after a 4- to 6-week trial), or in the presence of peptic ulcer disease or pancreatitis, this may become an appropriate option. In our patient, multiple attempts at passing an NJ feeding tube were unsuccessful, and she needed an operative procedure for insertion of a G-J feeding tube.  

Further surgical intervention is usually reserved for those patients with long-standing SMAS for whom medical management has failed or other issues, such as pancreatitis, colitis, or megaduodenum, have arisen. Many operations are described in the literature. A duodenojejunostomy to bypass the site of the obstruction is one option. Another is duodenal derotation (Strong procedure) to alter the aortomesenteric angle and place the third and fourth duodenal portions to the right of the SMA. Other procedures include a Roux-en-Y duodenojejunostomy and duodenal uncrossing. A lateral duodenojejunostomy between the second portion of the duodenum and the jejunum is considered the simplest surgical technique. It achieves successful outcomes in 90% of cases.2-5,14 With regards to SMAS and scoliosis, it is extremely rare that this kind of surgical intervention would be necessary.

Conclusion

When planning operative spinal correction in scoliosis patients (especially females) who have a low BMI at the time of surgery and who have increased thoracic stiffness, be alert for signs and symptoms of SMAS. This rare complication can develop, and timely diagnosis and medical management will decrease morbidity and shorten the length of time needed for nutritional rehabilitation.

References

1.    Lee TH, Lee JS, Jo Y, et al. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: where do we stand today? J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(12):2203-2211.

2.    Chan DK, Mak KS, Cheah YL. Successful nutritional therapy for superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Singapore Med J. 2012;53(11):e233-e236.

3.    Beltrán OD, Martinez AV, Manrique Mdel C, Rodriguez JS, Febres EL, Peña SR. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in a patient with Charcot Marie Tooth disease. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;3(12):197-200.

4.    Verhoef PA, Rampal A. Unique challenges for appropriate management of a 16-year-old girl with superior mesenteric artery syndrome as a result of anorexia nervosa: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2009;3:127.

5.    Kingham TP, Shen R, Ren C. Laparoscopic treatment of superior mesenteric artery syndrome. JSLS. 2004;8(4):376-379.

6.    Schauer SG, Thompson AJ, Bebarta VS. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in a young military basic trainee. Mil Med. 2013;178(3):e398-e399.

7.    Karrer FM, Jones SA, Vargas JH. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Treatment and management. Medscape. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/932220. Updated July 27, 2015. Accessed August 3, 2015.

8.    Arthurs OJ, Mehta U, Set PA. Nutcracker and SMA syndromes: What is the normal SMA angle in children? Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(8):e854-e861.

9.    Capitano S, Donatelli G, Boccoli G. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome--Believe in it! Report of a case. Case Rep Surg. 2012;2012(10):282646.

10.  Sabbagh C, Santin E, Potier A, Regimbeau JM. The superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a rare etiology for proximal obstructive syndrome. J Visc Surg. 2012;149(6):428-429.

11.  Shah MA, Albright MB, Vogt MT, Moreland MS. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in scoliosis surgery: weight percentile for height as an indicator of risk. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003;23(5):665-668.

12.  Tsirikos AI, Anakwe RE, Baker AD. Late presentation of superior mesenteric artery syndrome following scoliosis surgery: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2008;2(9):9.

13.  Hod-Feins R, Copeliovitch L, Abu-Kishk I, et al. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome after scoliosis repair surgery: a case study and reassessment of the syndrome’s pathogenesis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2007;16(5):345-349.

14.  Kennedy KV, Yela R, Achalandabaso Mdel M, Martín-Pérez E. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2013;105(4):236-238.

15.  Agrawal S, Patel H. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Surgery. 2013;153(4):601-602.

16.  Felton BM, White JM, Racine MA. An uncommon case of abdominal pain: superior mesenteric artery syndrome. West J Emerg Med. 2012;13(6):501-502.

17.  Kothari TH, Machnicki S, Kurtz L. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011;25(11):599-600.

18.  Bauer S, Karplus R, Belsky V, Mha HA. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a forgotten entity. Isr Med Assoc J. 2013;15(4):189-191.

19.  Ricca RL, Kasten J, Javid PJ. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome after minimally invasive correction of pectus excavatum: impact of post-operative weight loss. J Pediatr Surg. 2012;47(11):2137-2139.

References

1.    Lee TH, Lee JS, Jo Y, et al. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: where do we stand today? J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(12):2203-2211.

2.    Chan DK, Mak KS, Cheah YL. Successful nutritional therapy for superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Singapore Med J. 2012;53(11):e233-e236.

3.    Beltrán OD, Martinez AV, Manrique Mdel C, Rodriguez JS, Febres EL, Peña SR. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in a patient with Charcot Marie Tooth disease. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;3(12):197-200.

4.    Verhoef PA, Rampal A. Unique challenges for appropriate management of a 16-year-old girl with superior mesenteric artery syndrome as a result of anorexia nervosa: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2009;3:127.

5.    Kingham TP, Shen R, Ren C. Laparoscopic treatment of superior mesenteric artery syndrome. JSLS. 2004;8(4):376-379.

6.    Schauer SG, Thompson AJ, Bebarta VS. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in a young military basic trainee. Mil Med. 2013;178(3):e398-e399.

7.    Karrer FM, Jones SA, Vargas JH. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Treatment and management. Medscape. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/932220. Updated July 27, 2015. Accessed August 3, 2015.

8.    Arthurs OJ, Mehta U, Set PA. Nutcracker and SMA syndromes: What is the normal SMA angle in children? Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(8):e854-e861.

9.    Capitano S, Donatelli G, Boccoli G. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome--Believe in it! Report of a case. Case Rep Surg. 2012;2012(10):282646.

10.  Sabbagh C, Santin E, Potier A, Regimbeau JM. The superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a rare etiology for proximal obstructive syndrome. J Visc Surg. 2012;149(6):428-429.

11.  Shah MA, Albright MB, Vogt MT, Moreland MS. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome in scoliosis surgery: weight percentile for height as an indicator of risk. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003;23(5):665-668.

12.  Tsirikos AI, Anakwe RE, Baker AD. Late presentation of superior mesenteric artery syndrome following scoliosis surgery: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2008;2(9):9.

13.  Hod-Feins R, Copeliovitch L, Abu-Kishk I, et al. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome after scoliosis repair surgery: a case study and reassessment of the syndrome’s pathogenesis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2007;16(5):345-349.

14.  Kennedy KV, Yela R, Achalandabaso Mdel M, Martín-Pérez E. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2013;105(4):236-238.

15.  Agrawal S, Patel H. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Surgery. 2013;153(4):601-602.

16.  Felton BM, White JM, Racine MA. An uncommon case of abdominal pain: superior mesenteric artery syndrome. West J Emerg Med. 2012;13(6):501-502.

17.  Kothari TH, Machnicki S, Kurtz L. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011;25(11):599-600.

18.  Bauer S, Karplus R, Belsky V, Mha HA. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome: a forgotten entity. Isr Med Assoc J. 2013;15(4):189-191.

19.  Ricca RL, Kasten J, Javid PJ. Superior mesenteric artery syndrome after minimally invasive correction of pectus excavatum: impact of post-operative weight loss. J Pediatr Surg. 2012;47(11):2137-2139.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Page Number
E350-E354
Page Number
E350-E354
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
A Rare Cause of Postoperative Abdominal Pain in a Spinal Fusion Patient
Display Headline
A Rare Cause of Postoperative Abdominal Pain in a Spinal Fusion Patient
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, abdominal, pain, spinal fusion, spine, stomach, nausea, esmesis, bowel, deformity, feeding tube, surgery, spinal, nutrition, adolescent, superior mesenteric artery syndrome, SMAS, horn, beebe, king
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, case report, online exclusive, abdominal, pain, spinal fusion, spine, stomach, nausea, esmesis, bowel, deformity, feeding tube, surgery, spinal, nutrition, adolescent, superior mesenteric artery syndrome, SMAS, horn, beebe, king
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Nonoperative Management of Multiple Hand Enchondromas in Ollier Disease With Progressive Ossification

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:31
Display Headline
Nonoperative Management of Multiple Hand Enchondromas in Ollier Disease With Progressive Ossification

Ollier disease, or multiple enchondromatosis, is a rare nonfamilial condition characterized by multiple cartilaginous tumors often beginning in early childhood. There is significant variation in disease distribution, location, size, number of lesions, and behavior, but the tumors are often located unilaterally.1 Enchondromas are most commonly found in the metacarpals, metatarsals, and phalanges, and develop from metaphyseal bone in close proximity to the physis. They frequently present as painless masses or are incidentally noted during the evaluation of another musculoskeletal condition. Radiographically, enchondromas of the hands and feet appear as oval radiolucencies with thinned, sclerotic rims. The lesions have varying degrees of mineralization and endosteal scalloping, and may expand the bone.2 Enchondromas usually enlarge until skeletal maturity and have been observed to ossify spontaneously.1,3 The clinical course of Ollier disease is variable, and a number of cases of significant hand deformity and malignant transformation have been reported.4-6

In this case report, we present a mild form of Ollier disease isolated to the patient’s left hand, which we followed for 8 years, demonstrating part of the natural history of these lesions. We discuss the patient’s clinical features, radiologic findings, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and follow-up, as well as review the literature. The patient and the patient’s family provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

A 10-year-old, right-handed girl was referred to our department for the evaluation of left-hand masses. At age 3 years, the patient underwent a chondroma excision from the middle phalanx of her middle finger on her left hand. No operative or pathology report was available from this surgery, and the patient tolerated the procedure well without any complications. At the time of presentation, the masses did not cause any pain, motor or sensory dysfunction, or any systemic symptoms. No history of recent or distant trauma was elicited. The patient’s medical and family history was unremarkable.

On physical examination, there was a firm, immobile, nontender palpable mass over the dorsal aspect of the distal second metacarpal bone of the left hand. The mass extended medially between the second and third metacarpals. A second small, firm, nontender left-hand mass was palpated over the volar aspect of her proximal phalanx on her index finger. She was neurovascularly intact with full active range of motion of the metacarpophalangeal and proximal and distal interphalangeal joints. There was no angular deformity of the digits. Plain radiographs taken at the time of initial presentation showed a 2.3×1.7-cm radiolucent lesion located in the metaphysis and diaphysis of the second metacarpal of the left hand (Figures 1A-1C). The lesion had varying degrees of mineralization with cortical thinning and expansion in the volar, dorsal, radial, and ulnar directions, consistent with a chondroid lesion. The second and third lesions were oval radiolucencies with sclerotic rims located at the metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction of the proximal phalanx of the index finger and middle phalanx of the middle finger, respectively. No fractures were identified in the radiographs, and the physes were open at this time. The patient was diagnosed with multiple enchondromatosis, or Ollier disease.

Our case showed 1 episode of pain and tenderness to palpation at the second proximal phalanx approximately 6 months after initial presentation. We attributed the pain and tenderness to a small pathologic fracture but did not see radiographic evidence of this. We elected to provide a trial of supportive measures, such as splinting and buddy taping, and to monitor the pain with a tentative plan of open biopsy with curettage and bone grafting if the pain persisted or evidence of fracture was seen on radiographs. The pain and tenderness to palpation resolved at a follow-up visit, and the surgery was deferred.

The patient was treated nonoperatively at initial presentation given the lack of significant cosmetic deformity or functional compromise and was advised close follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Given the absence of disease progression, annual checks (ie, clinical examination and radiographs) in a skeletally immature patient were decided on after consultation with the patient and parent. The family was educated about the possibility of pathologic fracture from minimal trauma to the hand versus the small risk of iatrogenic physeal injury with surgical curettage and bone grafting. No protective splinting was offered. A favorable prognosis and reassurance was provided to the patient and family, given the absence of symptoms, low suspicion and risk of malignant transformation, and stability of the lesion. Serial radiographs showed gradual increases in the lesions’ sizes but were consistent with the stable growth of the metacarpal and phalanges. With the patient nearing skeletal maturity, no pathologic fractures were identified on radiography during follow-up, and the risks of surgery lessened with growth; however, the continued absence of symptoms led to the mutual decision to continue observation.

 

 

Nearly 8 years after initial presentation, plain radiographs showed closed physes and partially ossified bone masses (Figures 2A-2C). The metacarpal lesion measured 3.2×1.5 cm, and the cortex appeared thickened and regular. The proximal phalanx lesion had a thickened cortex without periosteal reaction, and the middle phalanx lesion appeared to be completely healed. The patient has been asymptomatic for many years, and she has retained complete function of her left hand without any growth retardation, angular deformity, or pathologic fracture. A small but potential risk of malignant transformation was discussed with the patient and her family, as was the need for lifetime follow-up. We intend to follow the enchondromas clinically and radiographically every 2 years and obtain new radiographs if the mass presents with new clinical findings, such as enlargement or pain, for surveillance of tumor transformation. If the patient desired or symptoms developed, curettage and bone grafting would be offered, and the surgical tissue would be sent for pathologic analysis. A bone scan that was obtained at the request of the patient, when she was 21 years old, showed no other sites of disease besides the fingers.

Discussion

Multiple enchondromatosis was first described by Ollier at the turn of the 19th century and has been estimated to affect one in every 100,000 persons.1 The low prevalence and variable manifestations of Ollier disease lead clinicians to handle the disease and its complications, namely skeletal deformity and malignant transformation, on a case-by-case approach. Additionally, the prognosis of Ollier disease with malignant transformation is quite variable, with studies reporting the estimated incidence as 5% to 50%.7 Muramatsu and colleagues6 reported that the occurrence of malignant transformation of multiple enchondromas limited to the bones of the hand was extremely rare, with only 12 cases of malignant transformation. Enchondromas of the pelvis, scapula, and long bones of the extremities have increased risks and rates of secondary transformation to chondrosarcoma.8

A recent large European multicenter retrospective study investigating the clinical characteristics and behavior of enchondromas in 144 patients with Ollier disease has provided new information regarding this rare disease.7 Verdegaal and colleagues7 divided patients into 3 categories depending on their distribution of enchondromas. The development of chondrosarcoma was notably different between individuals with enchondromas limited to the small bones of the hands and feet (15%, group I) versus individuals with enchondromas limited to the long bones and flat bones (43%, group II) or individuals with enchondromas of the short, long, and flat bones (46%, group III).7 The only location found to be statistically significant for the development of chondrosarcoma was the pelvis.

The clinical findings associated with risk of malignant transformation of enchondromas are increasing size of the lesion and onset of pain and tenderness. Dahlin and Salvador9 reported that only 60% of patients with chondrosarcoma of the hand experience pain. The absence of pain may lead to a delay in patient presentation to the clinician.5,6 Radiographic findings of malignant transformation include the classic features of temporal increases in the lesion’s size after skeletal maturity and cortical destruction associated with soft-tissue invasion. However, both findings are nonspecific for differentiating enchondromas from grade 1 chondrosarcomas as described by Geirnaerdt and colleagues.10

Sassoon and colleagues11 reported on a series of hand enchondromas treated operatively. Subgroup analysis between pathologic fractures treated primarily or in delayed fashion showed similar outcomes for achieving full motion and similar number of complications; however, they noted that the delayed group required 7 more weeks of immobilization. Additionally, review of the whole series showed 1 episode of metacarpal shortening and 1 occurrence of angular malalignment. In our patient, we were concerned about introducing an iatrogenic cosmetic deformity, and we believed a pathologic fracture could be managed expectantly. Overall, patients without pathologic fracture treated surgically experienced a complication rate of 12%, whereas patients with a fracture had a complication rate of 20%.11 The majority of patients with multiple enchondromatosis treated with surgical curettage and grafting had successful outcomes, with 86% of patients regaining full motion, but the recurrence rate was 21%.11 Patients with expansile lesions regained less motion than patients with nonexpansile lesions. There was a single lesion believed preoperatively to be an enchondroma, but it underwent malignant transformation, as confirmed on intraoperative pathology. This patient had Maffucci syndrome and was treated with an amputation through the metacarpophalangeal joint.

There are 3 options for treating hand enchondromas: observation, curettage alone, or curettage with bone grafting. There is no consensus about conservative management, timing of intervention, or risk of pathologic fracture. Each patient is treated individually with attention to reason for presentation, number of lesions, associated pain, deformity, or pathologic fracture. Operative criteria include high risk of pathologic fracture based on location of enchondroma, cortical thinning, and previous pathologic fracture with resulting angular deformity. Nonoperative management may increase the risk of pathologic fracture, particularly in patients involved in aggressive contact sports, but the physician may offer protective splinting or counsel the patient on activity modification. Our case provides a study of the natural history of multiple enchondromatosis and shows mild increases in the lesions’ sizes during the 8-year follow-up. This was an expected finding given the patient’s immature skeleton. The lesions’ cortices continued to ossify after the physes closed and now provides an excellent comparison for the identification of future malignant changes. 

 

 

Histologic analysis of biopsied or surgically treated lesions contributes to the differentiation between benign hand enchondromas and chondrosarcoma. Pathologic findings must be correlated with clinical and radiographic findings because hand enchondromas contain cytologic features of chondrosarcoma.12 In a series of 55 patients with chondrosarcoma, Liu and colleagues8 reported no cases from the hand. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported a total of 13 chondrosarcomas in the metacarpals and hand phalanges in 97 group I and III patients. Five of these lesions were grade 1, 2 were grade 2, 1 was grade 3, and 5 lesions were unknown.

For patients with multiple enchondromatosis limited to the hands, prognosis is relatively good with respect to risk of secondary chondrosarcoma transformation, metastasis of secondary chondrosarcoma, and death. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported the rate of secondary transformation in the hand to be 15%. Patil and colleagues13 reported no distant metastases in 23 patients with hand chondrosarcoma at mean follow-up of 8.5 years (range, 2-19 years), although none of their patients had Ollier disease. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported 7 of the 8 deaths in their study were related to development of pulmonary metastases; however, none originated from chondrosarcomas in the hand. Additionally, there were no disease-related deaths in 29 group I patients. Herget and colleagues,14 in summarizing the literature, postulated that the overall survival rate of patients with secondary chondrosarcoma at 5 years is approximately 90%.

In our case, the patient, who had 3 enchondromas isolated to the left hand, can be categorized in group I. Thus, this case highlights the natural history of a patient with hand enchondromas and demonstrates that enchondromatosis of the short tubular bones of the hands can mature and ossify.

References

1.    Silve C, Jüppner H. Ollier disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2006;1:37-42.

2.    Baert A. Encyclopedia of Diagnostic Imaging. Vol. 1. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2008.

3.    Takigawa K. Chondroma of the bones of the hand. A review of 110 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1971;53(8):1591-1600.

4.    Mosher J. Multiple enchondromatosis of the hand. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58(5):717-719.

5.    Goto T, Motoi T, Komiya K, et al. Chondrosarcoma of the hand secondary to multiple enchondromatosis; report of two cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003;123(1):42-47.

6.    Muramatsu K, Kawakami Y, Tani Y, Taguchi T. Malignant transformation of multiple enchondromas in the hand: case report. J Hand Surg Am. 2011;36(2):304-307.

7.    Verdegaal SH, Bovee JV, Pansuriya TC, et al. Incidence, predictive factors, and prognosis of chondrosarcoma in patients with Ollier disease and Maffucci syndrome: an international multicenter study of 161 patients. Oncologist. 2011;16(12):1771-1779.

8.    Liu J, Hudkins PG, Swee RG, Unni KK. Bone sarcomas associated with Ollier’s disease. Cancer. 1987;59(7):1376-1385.

9.    Dahlin D, Salvador AH. Chondrosarcomas of bones of the hands and feet—a study of 30 cases. Cancer. 1974;34(3):755-760.

10.  Geirnaerdt MJ, Hermans J, Bloem JL, et al. Usefulness of radiography in differentiating enchondroma from central grade I chondrosarcoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(4):1097-1104.

11.  Sassoon AA, Fitz-Gibbon PD, Harmsen WS, Moran SL. Enchondromas of the hand: factors affecting recurrence, healing, motion, and malignant transformation. J Hand Surg Am. 2012;37(6):1229-1234.

12.  Ogose A, Unni KK, Swee R, May GK, Rowland CM, Sim FH. Chondrosarcoma of small bones of the hands and feet. Cancer. 1997;80(1):50-59.

13.  Patil S, de Silva MV, Crossan J, Reid R. Chondrosarcoma of small bones of the hand. J Hand Surg Br. 2003;28(6):602-608.

14.  Herget GW, Strohm P, Rottenburger C, et al. Insights in Enchondroma, Enchondromatosis and the risk of secondary Chondrosarcoma. Review of the literature with an emphasis on the clinical behaviour, radiology, malignant transformation and the follow up. Neoplasma. 2014;61(4):365-378.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Kyle MacGillis, MD, and David King, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E343-E346
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, online exclusive, case report, hand enchondromas, hand, ollier disease, disease, ollier, ossification, bones, chondrosarcoma, tumors, macgillis, king
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Kyle MacGillis, MD, and David King, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Kyle MacGillis, MD, and David King, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Ollier disease, or multiple enchondromatosis, is a rare nonfamilial condition characterized by multiple cartilaginous tumors often beginning in early childhood. There is significant variation in disease distribution, location, size, number of lesions, and behavior, but the tumors are often located unilaterally.1 Enchondromas are most commonly found in the metacarpals, metatarsals, and phalanges, and develop from metaphyseal bone in close proximity to the physis. They frequently present as painless masses or are incidentally noted during the evaluation of another musculoskeletal condition. Radiographically, enchondromas of the hands and feet appear as oval radiolucencies with thinned, sclerotic rims. The lesions have varying degrees of mineralization and endosteal scalloping, and may expand the bone.2 Enchondromas usually enlarge until skeletal maturity and have been observed to ossify spontaneously.1,3 The clinical course of Ollier disease is variable, and a number of cases of significant hand deformity and malignant transformation have been reported.4-6

In this case report, we present a mild form of Ollier disease isolated to the patient’s left hand, which we followed for 8 years, demonstrating part of the natural history of these lesions. We discuss the patient’s clinical features, radiologic findings, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and follow-up, as well as review the literature. The patient and the patient’s family provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

A 10-year-old, right-handed girl was referred to our department for the evaluation of left-hand masses. At age 3 years, the patient underwent a chondroma excision from the middle phalanx of her middle finger on her left hand. No operative or pathology report was available from this surgery, and the patient tolerated the procedure well without any complications. At the time of presentation, the masses did not cause any pain, motor or sensory dysfunction, or any systemic symptoms. No history of recent or distant trauma was elicited. The patient’s medical and family history was unremarkable.

On physical examination, there was a firm, immobile, nontender palpable mass over the dorsal aspect of the distal second metacarpal bone of the left hand. The mass extended medially between the second and third metacarpals. A second small, firm, nontender left-hand mass was palpated over the volar aspect of her proximal phalanx on her index finger. She was neurovascularly intact with full active range of motion of the metacarpophalangeal and proximal and distal interphalangeal joints. There was no angular deformity of the digits. Plain radiographs taken at the time of initial presentation showed a 2.3×1.7-cm radiolucent lesion located in the metaphysis and diaphysis of the second metacarpal of the left hand (Figures 1A-1C). The lesion had varying degrees of mineralization with cortical thinning and expansion in the volar, dorsal, radial, and ulnar directions, consistent with a chondroid lesion. The second and third lesions were oval radiolucencies with sclerotic rims located at the metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction of the proximal phalanx of the index finger and middle phalanx of the middle finger, respectively. No fractures were identified in the radiographs, and the physes were open at this time. The patient was diagnosed with multiple enchondromatosis, or Ollier disease.

Our case showed 1 episode of pain and tenderness to palpation at the second proximal phalanx approximately 6 months after initial presentation. We attributed the pain and tenderness to a small pathologic fracture but did not see radiographic evidence of this. We elected to provide a trial of supportive measures, such as splinting and buddy taping, and to monitor the pain with a tentative plan of open biopsy with curettage and bone grafting if the pain persisted or evidence of fracture was seen on radiographs. The pain and tenderness to palpation resolved at a follow-up visit, and the surgery was deferred.

The patient was treated nonoperatively at initial presentation given the lack of significant cosmetic deformity or functional compromise and was advised close follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Given the absence of disease progression, annual checks (ie, clinical examination and radiographs) in a skeletally immature patient were decided on after consultation with the patient and parent. The family was educated about the possibility of pathologic fracture from minimal trauma to the hand versus the small risk of iatrogenic physeal injury with surgical curettage and bone grafting. No protective splinting was offered. A favorable prognosis and reassurance was provided to the patient and family, given the absence of symptoms, low suspicion and risk of malignant transformation, and stability of the lesion. Serial radiographs showed gradual increases in the lesions’ sizes but were consistent with the stable growth of the metacarpal and phalanges. With the patient nearing skeletal maturity, no pathologic fractures were identified on radiography during follow-up, and the risks of surgery lessened with growth; however, the continued absence of symptoms led to the mutual decision to continue observation.

 

 

Nearly 8 years after initial presentation, plain radiographs showed closed physes and partially ossified bone masses (Figures 2A-2C). The metacarpal lesion measured 3.2×1.5 cm, and the cortex appeared thickened and regular. The proximal phalanx lesion had a thickened cortex without periosteal reaction, and the middle phalanx lesion appeared to be completely healed. The patient has been asymptomatic for many years, and she has retained complete function of her left hand without any growth retardation, angular deformity, or pathologic fracture. A small but potential risk of malignant transformation was discussed with the patient and her family, as was the need for lifetime follow-up. We intend to follow the enchondromas clinically and radiographically every 2 years and obtain new radiographs if the mass presents with new clinical findings, such as enlargement or pain, for surveillance of tumor transformation. If the patient desired or symptoms developed, curettage and bone grafting would be offered, and the surgical tissue would be sent for pathologic analysis. A bone scan that was obtained at the request of the patient, when she was 21 years old, showed no other sites of disease besides the fingers.

Discussion

Multiple enchondromatosis was first described by Ollier at the turn of the 19th century and has been estimated to affect one in every 100,000 persons.1 The low prevalence and variable manifestations of Ollier disease lead clinicians to handle the disease and its complications, namely skeletal deformity and malignant transformation, on a case-by-case approach. Additionally, the prognosis of Ollier disease with malignant transformation is quite variable, with studies reporting the estimated incidence as 5% to 50%.7 Muramatsu and colleagues6 reported that the occurrence of malignant transformation of multiple enchondromas limited to the bones of the hand was extremely rare, with only 12 cases of malignant transformation. Enchondromas of the pelvis, scapula, and long bones of the extremities have increased risks and rates of secondary transformation to chondrosarcoma.8

A recent large European multicenter retrospective study investigating the clinical characteristics and behavior of enchondromas in 144 patients with Ollier disease has provided new information regarding this rare disease.7 Verdegaal and colleagues7 divided patients into 3 categories depending on their distribution of enchondromas. The development of chondrosarcoma was notably different between individuals with enchondromas limited to the small bones of the hands and feet (15%, group I) versus individuals with enchondromas limited to the long bones and flat bones (43%, group II) or individuals with enchondromas of the short, long, and flat bones (46%, group III).7 The only location found to be statistically significant for the development of chondrosarcoma was the pelvis.

The clinical findings associated with risk of malignant transformation of enchondromas are increasing size of the lesion and onset of pain and tenderness. Dahlin and Salvador9 reported that only 60% of patients with chondrosarcoma of the hand experience pain. The absence of pain may lead to a delay in patient presentation to the clinician.5,6 Radiographic findings of malignant transformation include the classic features of temporal increases in the lesion’s size after skeletal maturity and cortical destruction associated with soft-tissue invasion. However, both findings are nonspecific for differentiating enchondromas from grade 1 chondrosarcomas as described by Geirnaerdt and colleagues.10

Sassoon and colleagues11 reported on a series of hand enchondromas treated operatively. Subgroup analysis between pathologic fractures treated primarily or in delayed fashion showed similar outcomes for achieving full motion and similar number of complications; however, they noted that the delayed group required 7 more weeks of immobilization. Additionally, review of the whole series showed 1 episode of metacarpal shortening and 1 occurrence of angular malalignment. In our patient, we were concerned about introducing an iatrogenic cosmetic deformity, and we believed a pathologic fracture could be managed expectantly. Overall, patients without pathologic fracture treated surgically experienced a complication rate of 12%, whereas patients with a fracture had a complication rate of 20%.11 The majority of patients with multiple enchondromatosis treated with surgical curettage and grafting had successful outcomes, with 86% of patients regaining full motion, but the recurrence rate was 21%.11 Patients with expansile lesions regained less motion than patients with nonexpansile lesions. There was a single lesion believed preoperatively to be an enchondroma, but it underwent malignant transformation, as confirmed on intraoperative pathology. This patient had Maffucci syndrome and was treated with an amputation through the metacarpophalangeal joint.

There are 3 options for treating hand enchondromas: observation, curettage alone, or curettage with bone grafting. There is no consensus about conservative management, timing of intervention, or risk of pathologic fracture. Each patient is treated individually with attention to reason for presentation, number of lesions, associated pain, deformity, or pathologic fracture. Operative criteria include high risk of pathologic fracture based on location of enchondroma, cortical thinning, and previous pathologic fracture with resulting angular deformity. Nonoperative management may increase the risk of pathologic fracture, particularly in patients involved in aggressive contact sports, but the physician may offer protective splinting or counsel the patient on activity modification. Our case provides a study of the natural history of multiple enchondromatosis and shows mild increases in the lesions’ sizes during the 8-year follow-up. This was an expected finding given the patient’s immature skeleton. The lesions’ cortices continued to ossify after the physes closed and now provides an excellent comparison for the identification of future malignant changes. 

 

 

Histologic analysis of biopsied or surgically treated lesions contributes to the differentiation between benign hand enchondromas and chondrosarcoma. Pathologic findings must be correlated with clinical and radiographic findings because hand enchondromas contain cytologic features of chondrosarcoma.12 In a series of 55 patients with chondrosarcoma, Liu and colleagues8 reported no cases from the hand. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported a total of 13 chondrosarcomas in the metacarpals and hand phalanges in 97 group I and III patients. Five of these lesions were grade 1, 2 were grade 2, 1 was grade 3, and 5 lesions were unknown.

For patients with multiple enchondromatosis limited to the hands, prognosis is relatively good with respect to risk of secondary chondrosarcoma transformation, metastasis of secondary chondrosarcoma, and death. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported the rate of secondary transformation in the hand to be 15%. Patil and colleagues13 reported no distant metastases in 23 patients with hand chondrosarcoma at mean follow-up of 8.5 years (range, 2-19 years), although none of their patients had Ollier disease. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported 7 of the 8 deaths in their study were related to development of pulmonary metastases; however, none originated from chondrosarcomas in the hand. Additionally, there were no disease-related deaths in 29 group I patients. Herget and colleagues,14 in summarizing the literature, postulated that the overall survival rate of patients with secondary chondrosarcoma at 5 years is approximately 90%.

In our case, the patient, who had 3 enchondromas isolated to the left hand, can be categorized in group I. Thus, this case highlights the natural history of a patient with hand enchondromas and demonstrates that enchondromatosis of the short tubular bones of the hands can mature and ossify.

Ollier disease, or multiple enchondromatosis, is a rare nonfamilial condition characterized by multiple cartilaginous tumors often beginning in early childhood. There is significant variation in disease distribution, location, size, number of lesions, and behavior, but the tumors are often located unilaterally.1 Enchondromas are most commonly found in the metacarpals, metatarsals, and phalanges, and develop from metaphyseal bone in close proximity to the physis. They frequently present as painless masses or are incidentally noted during the evaluation of another musculoskeletal condition. Radiographically, enchondromas of the hands and feet appear as oval radiolucencies with thinned, sclerotic rims. The lesions have varying degrees of mineralization and endosteal scalloping, and may expand the bone.2 Enchondromas usually enlarge until skeletal maturity and have been observed to ossify spontaneously.1,3 The clinical course of Ollier disease is variable, and a number of cases of significant hand deformity and malignant transformation have been reported.4-6

In this case report, we present a mild form of Ollier disease isolated to the patient’s left hand, which we followed for 8 years, demonstrating part of the natural history of these lesions. We discuss the patient’s clinical features, radiologic findings, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and follow-up, as well as review the literature. The patient and the patient’s family provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

A 10-year-old, right-handed girl was referred to our department for the evaluation of left-hand masses. At age 3 years, the patient underwent a chondroma excision from the middle phalanx of her middle finger on her left hand. No operative or pathology report was available from this surgery, and the patient tolerated the procedure well without any complications. At the time of presentation, the masses did not cause any pain, motor or sensory dysfunction, or any systemic symptoms. No history of recent or distant trauma was elicited. The patient’s medical and family history was unremarkable.

On physical examination, there was a firm, immobile, nontender palpable mass over the dorsal aspect of the distal second metacarpal bone of the left hand. The mass extended medially between the second and third metacarpals. A second small, firm, nontender left-hand mass was palpated over the volar aspect of her proximal phalanx on her index finger. She was neurovascularly intact with full active range of motion of the metacarpophalangeal and proximal and distal interphalangeal joints. There was no angular deformity of the digits. Plain radiographs taken at the time of initial presentation showed a 2.3×1.7-cm radiolucent lesion located in the metaphysis and diaphysis of the second metacarpal of the left hand (Figures 1A-1C). The lesion had varying degrees of mineralization with cortical thinning and expansion in the volar, dorsal, radial, and ulnar directions, consistent with a chondroid lesion. The second and third lesions were oval radiolucencies with sclerotic rims located at the metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction of the proximal phalanx of the index finger and middle phalanx of the middle finger, respectively. No fractures were identified in the radiographs, and the physes were open at this time. The patient was diagnosed with multiple enchondromatosis, or Ollier disease.

Our case showed 1 episode of pain and tenderness to palpation at the second proximal phalanx approximately 6 months after initial presentation. We attributed the pain and tenderness to a small pathologic fracture but did not see radiographic evidence of this. We elected to provide a trial of supportive measures, such as splinting and buddy taping, and to monitor the pain with a tentative plan of open biopsy with curettage and bone grafting if the pain persisted or evidence of fracture was seen on radiographs. The pain and tenderness to palpation resolved at a follow-up visit, and the surgery was deferred.

The patient was treated nonoperatively at initial presentation given the lack of significant cosmetic deformity or functional compromise and was advised close follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Given the absence of disease progression, annual checks (ie, clinical examination and radiographs) in a skeletally immature patient were decided on after consultation with the patient and parent. The family was educated about the possibility of pathologic fracture from minimal trauma to the hand versus the small risk of iatrogenic physeal injury with surgical curettage and bone grafting. No protective splinting was offered. A favorable prognosis and reassurance was provided to the patient and family, given the absence of symptoms, low suspicion and risk of malignant transformation, and stability of the lesion. Serial radiographs showed gradual increases in the lesions’ sizes but were consistent with the stable growth of the metacarpal and phalanges. With the patient nearing skeletal maturity, no pathologic fractures were identified on radiography during follow-up, and the risks of surgery lessened with growth; however, the continued absence of symptoms led to the mutual decision to continue observation.

 

 

Nearly 8 years after initial presentation, plain radiographs showed closed physes and partially ossified bone masses (Figures 2A-2C). The metacarpal lesion measured 3.2×1.5 cm, and the cortex appeared thickened and regular. The proximal phalanx lesion had a thickened cortex without periosteal reaction, and the middle phalanx lesion appeared to be completely healed. The patient has been asymptomatic for many years, and she has retained complete function of her left hand without any growth retardation, angular deformity, or pathologic fracture. A small but potential risk of malignant transformation was discussed with the patient and her family, as was the need for lifetime follow-up. We intend to follow the enchondromas clinically and radiographically every 2 years and obtain new radiographs if the mass presents with new clinical findings, such as enlargement or pain, for surveillance of tumor transformation. If the patient desired or symptoms developed, curettage and bone grafting would be offered, and the surgical tissue would be sent for pathologic analysis. A bone scan that was obtained at the request of the patient, when she was 21 years old, showed no other sites of disease besides the fingers.

Discussion

Multiple enchondromatosis was first described by Ollier at the turn of the 19th century and has been estimated to affect one in every 100,000 persons.1 The low prevalence and variable manifestations of Ollier disease lead clinicians to handle the disease and its complications, namely skeletal deformity and malignant transformation, on a case-by-case approach. Additionally, the prognosis of Ollier disease with malignant transformation is quite variable, with studies reporting the estimated incidence as 5% to 50%.7 Muramatsu and colleagues6 reported that the occurrence of malignant transformation of multiple enchondromas limited to the bones of the hand was extremely rare, with only 12 cases of malignant transformation. Enchondromas of the pelvis, scapula, and long bones of the extremities have increased risks and rates of secondary transformation to chondrosarcoma.8

A recent large European multicenter retrospective study investigating the clinical characteristics and behavior of enchondromas in 144 patients with Ollier disease has provided new information regarding this rare disease.7 Verdegaal and colleagues7 divided patients into 3 categories depending on their distribution of enchondromas. The development of chondrosarcoma was notably different between individuals with enchondromas limited to the small bones of the hands and feet (15%, group I) versus individuals with enchondromas limited to the long bones and flat bones (43%, group II) or individuals with enchondromas of the short, long, and flat bones (46%, group III).7 The only location found to be statistically significant for the development of chondrosarcoma was the pelvis.

The clinical findings associated with risk of malignant transformation of enchondromas are increasing size of the lesion and onset of pain and tenderness. Dahlin and Salvador9 reported that only 60% of patients with chondrosarcoma of the hand experience pain. The absence of pain may lead to a delay in patient presentation to the clinician.5,6 Radiographic findings of malignant transformation include the classic features of temporal increases in the lesion’s size after skeletal maturity and cortical destruction associated with soft-tissue invasion. However, both findings are nonspecific for differentiating enchondromas from grade 1 chondrosarcomas as described by Geirnaerdt and colleagues.10

Sassoon and colleagues11 reported on a series of hand enchondromas treated operatively. Subgroup analysis between pathologic fractures treated primarily or in delayed fashion showed similar outcomes for achieving full motion and similar number of complications; however, they noted that the delayed group required 7 more weeks of immobilization. Additionally, review of the whole series showed 1 episode of metacarpal shortening and 1 occurrence of angular malalignment. In our patient, we were concerned about introducing an iatrogenic cosmetic deformity, and we believed a pathologic fracture could be managed expectantly. Overall, patients without pathologic fracture treated surgically experienced a complication rate of 12%, whereas patients with a fracture had a complication rate of 20%.11 The majority of patients with multiple enchondromatosis treated with surgical curettage and grafting had successful outcomes, with 86% of patients regaining full motion, but the recurrence rate was 21%.11 Patients with expansile lesions regained less motion than patients with nonexpansile lesions. There was a single lesion believed preoperatively to be an enchondroma, but it underwent malignant transformation, as confirmed on intraoperative pathology. This patient had Maffucci syndrome and was treated with an amputation through the metacarpophalangeal joint.

There are 3 options for treating hand enchondromas: observation, curettage alone, or curettage with bone grafting. There is no consensus about conservative management, timing of intervention, or risk of pathologic fracture. Each patient is treated individually with attention to reason for presentation, number of lesions, associated pain, deformity, or pathologic fracture. Operative criteria include high risk of pathologic fracture based on location of enchondroma, cortical thinning, and previous pathologic fracture with resulting angular deformity. Nonoperative management may increase the risk of pathologic fracture, particularly in patients involved in aggressive contact sports, but the physician may offer protective splinting or counsel the patient on activity modification. Our case provides a study of the natural history of multiple enchondromatosis and shows mild increases in the lesions’ sizes during the 8-year follow-up. This was an expected finding given the patient’s immature skeleton. The lesions’ cortices continued to ossify after the physes closed and now provides an excellent comparison for the identification of future malignant changes. 

 

 

Histologic analysis of biopsied or surgically treated lesions contributes to the differentiation between benign hand enchondromas and chondrosarcoma. Pathologic findings must be correlated with clinical and radiographic findings because hand enchondromas contain cytologic features of chondrosarcoma.12 In a series of 55 patients with chondrosarcoma, Liu and colleagues8 reported no cases from the hand. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported a total of 13 chondrosarcomas in the metacarpals and hand phalanges in 97 group I and III patients. Five of these lesions were grade 1, 2 were grade 2, 1 was grade 3, and 5 lesions were unknown.

For patients with multiple enchondromatosis limited to the hands, prognosis is relatively good with respect to risk of secondary chondrosarcoma transformation, metastasis of secondary chondrosarcoma, and death. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported the rate of secondary transformation in the hand to be 15%. Patil and colleagues13 reported no distant metastases in 23 patients with hand chondrosarcoma at mean follow-up of 8.5 years (range, 2-19 years), although none of their patients had Ollier disease. Verdegaal and colleagues7 reported 7 of the 8 deaths in their study were related to development of pulmonary metastases; however, none originated from chondrosarcomas in the hand. Additionally, there were no disease-related deaths in 29 group I patients. Herget and colleagues,14 in summarizing the literature, postulated that the overall survival rate of patients with secondary chondrosarcoma at 5 years is approximately 90%.

In our case, the patient, who had 3 enchondromas isolated to the left hand, can be categorized in group I. Thus, this case highlights the natural history of a patient with hand enchondromas and demonstrates that enchondromatosis of the short tubular bones of the hands can mature and ossify.

References

1.    Silve C, Jüppner H. Ollier disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2006;1:37-42.

2.    Baert A. Encyclopedia of Diagnostic Imaging. Vol. 1. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2008.

3.    Takigawa K. Chondroma of the bones of the hand. A review of 110 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1971;53(8):1591-1600.

4.    Mosher J. Multiple enchondromatosis of the hand. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58(5):717-719.

5.    Goto T, Motoi T, Komiya K, et al. Chondrosarcoma of the hand secondary to multiple enchondromatosis; report of two cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003;123(1):42-47.

6.    Muramatsu K, Kawakami Y, Tani Y, Taguchi T. Malignant transformation of multiple enchondromas in the hand: case report. J Hand Surg Am. 2011;36(2):304-307.

7.    Verdegaal SH, Bovee JV, Pansuriya TC, et al. Incidence, predictive factors, and prognosis of chondrosarcoma in patients with Ollier disease and Maffucci syndrome: an international multicenter study of 161 patients. Oncologist. 2011;16(12):1771-1779.

8.    Liu J, Hudkins PG, Swee RG, Unni KK. Bone sarcomas associated with Ollier’s disease. Cancer. 1987;59(7):1376-1385.

9.    Dahlin D, Salvador AH. Chondrosarcomas of bones of the hands and feet—a study of 30 cases. Cancer. 1974;34(3):755-760.

10.  Geirnaerdt MJ, Hermans J, Bloem JL, et al. Usefulness of radiography in differentiating enchondroma from central grade I chondrosarcoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(4):1097-1104.

11.  Sassoon AA, Fitz-Gibbon PD, Harmsen WS, Moran SL. Enchondromas of the hand: factors affecting recurrence, healing, motion, and malignant transformation. J Hand Surg Am. 2012;37(6):1229-1234.

12.  Ogose A, Unni KK, Swee R, May GK, Rowland CM, Sim FH. Chondrosarcoma of small bones of the hands and feet. Cancer. 1997;80(1):50-59.

13.  Patil S, de Silva MV, Crossan J, Reid R. Chondrosarcoma of small bones of the hand. J Hand Surg Br. 2003;28(6):602-608.

14.  Herget GW, Strohm P, Rottenburger C, et al. Insights in Enchondroma, Enchondromatosis and the risk of secondary Chondrosarcoma. Review of the literature with an emphasis on the clinical behaviour, radiology, malignant transformation and the follow up. Neoplasma. 2014;61(4):365-378.

References

1.    Silve C, Jüppner H. Ollier disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2006;1:37-42.

2.    Baert A. Encyclopedia of Diagnostic Imaging. Vol. 1. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2008.

3.    Takigawa K. Chondroma of the bones of the hand. A review of 110 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1971;53(8):1591-1600.

4.    Mosher J. Multiple enchondromatosis of the hand. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58(5):717-719.

5.    Goto T, Motoi T, Komiya K, et al. Chondrosarcoma of the hand secondary to multiple enchondromatosis; report of two cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003;123(1):42-47.

6.    Muramatsu K, Kawakami Y, Tani Y, Taguchi T. Malignant transformation of multiple enchondromas in the hand: case report. J Hand Surg Am. 2011;36(2):304-307.

7.    Verdegaal SH, Bovee JV, Pansuriya TC, et al. Incidence, predictive factors, and prognosis of chondrosarcoma in patients with Ollier disease and Maffucci syndrome: an international multicenter study of 161 patients. Oncologist. 2011;16(12):1771-1779.

8.    Liu J, Hudkins PG, Swee RG, Unni KK. Bone sarcomas associated with Ollier’s disease. Cancer. 1987;59(7):1376-1385.

9.    Dahlin D, Salvador AH. Chondrosarcomas of bones of the hands and feet—a study of 30 cases. Cancer. 1974;34(3):755-760.

10.  Geirnaerdt MJ, Hermans J, Bloem JL, et al. Usefulness of radiography in differentiating enchondroma from central grade I chondrosarcoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(4):1097-1104.

11.  Sassoon AA, Fitz-Gibbon PD, Harmsen WS, Moran SL. Enchondromas of the hand: factors affecting recurrence, healing, motion, and malignant transformation. J Hand Surg Am. 2012;37(6):1229-1234.

12.  Ogose A, Unni KK, Swee R, May GK, Rowland CM, Sim FH. Chondrosarcoma of small bones of the hands and feet. Cancer. 1997;80(1):50-59.

13.  Patil S, de Silva MV, Crossan J, Reid R. Chondrosarcoma of small bones of the hand. J Hand Surg Br. 2003;28(6):602-608.

14.  Herget GW, Strohm P, Rottenburger C, et al. Insights in Enchondroma, Enchondromatosis and the risk of secondary Chondrosarcoma. Review of the literature with an emphasis on the clinical behaviour, radiology, malignant transformation and the follow up. Neoplasma. 2014;61(4):365-378.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Page Number
E343-E346
Page Number
E343-E346
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Nonoperative Management of Multiple Hand Enchondromas in Ollier Disease With Progressive Ossification
Display Headline
Nonoperative Management of Multiple Hand Enchondromas in Ollier Disease With Progressive Ossification
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, online exclusive, case report, hand enchondromas, hand, ollier disease, disease, ollier, ossification, bones, chondrosarcoma, tumors, macgillis, king
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, case report and literature review, online exclusive, case report, hand enchondromas, hand, ollier disease, disease, ollier, ossification, bones, chondrosarcoma, tumors, macgillis, king
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Midterm Follow-Up of Metal-Backed Glenoid Components in Anatomical Total Shoulder Arthroplasties

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:31
Display Headline
Midterm Follow-Up of Metal-Backed Glenoid Components in Anatomical Total Shoulder Arthroplasties

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is being performed with increasing frequency. According to recent data, the number of TSAs performed annually increased 2.5-fold from 2000 to 2008.1 As more are performed, the need for improved implant survival will increase as well. In particular, advances in glenoid survivorship will be a primary focus. Previous experience has demonstrated that the glenoid component is the most common source of loosening and failure, and glenoid loosening has been documented in 33% to 44% of arthroplasties, with the rate of radiographically lucent lines even higher.2-5 Thus, a correlation between increasing incidence of procedures and high rates of glenoid loosening represents the potential for a significant increase in the number of future revisions. A recent report from Germany indicated that TSA had a 3-fold higher relative burden of revision than hemiarthroplasty.6

Ingrowth metal-backed glenoid components offer the theoretical advantage of bone growth directly into the prosthesis with a single host–prosthesis interface. Use of a novel tantalum glenoid may avoid the stress-shielding, component-stiffness, dissociation, and backside-wear issues that have produced the high failure rates of conventional metal-backed glenoids. According to the literature, the multiple different-style cementless glenoids being used have had unpredictable outcomes and demonstrated an increased need for revisions.7-11

In this article, we present a case series of midterm radiographic and clinical outcomes for TSAs using porous tantalum glenoid components. Our goals were to further understanding of survivorship and complications associated with ingrowth glenoid components and to demonstrate the differences that may occur with use of tantalum.

Materials and Methods

Data were examined for all TSAs performed at a single institution between 2004 and 2013. Before reviewing the data, we obtained approval from the hospital institutional review board. Our retrospective chart review identified all patients who underwent TSA using a tantalum ingrowth glenoid component. Exclusion criteria included revision arthroplasty, use of a non-tantalum glenoid, reverse shoulder arthroplasty, and conversion from hemiarthroplasty to TSA. Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were identified. We obtained patient consent to examine the data collected, and patients were reexamined if they had not been seen within the past 12 months. Figures 1 and 2 show the preoperative radiographs.

The TSAs were performed by 2 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons using glenoid components with porous tantalum anchors (Zimmer). Indications for this procedure were age under 60 years, no prior surgery, and glenoid morphology allowing for version correction without bone grafting. Patients with severe posterior erosion that required bone graft or with a dysplastic glenoid were not indicated for this glenoid implant.

In each case, the anesthesia team placed an indwelling interscalene catheter, and then the surgery was performed with the patient under deep sedation. The beach-chair position and a deltopectoral approach were used, and biceps tendon tenodesis was performed. The subscapularis was elevated with a lesser tuberosity osteotomy and was repaired with nonabsorbable braided suture at the end of the case. During glenoid implantation, the periphery of the polyethylene was cemented. This is consistent with the approved method of implantation for this device. Closed suction drainage was used. After surgery, the patient was restricted to no weight-bearing. During the first 6 weeks, passive forward elevation was allowed to 130° and external rotation to 30°. Active and active-assisted range of motion was started at 6 weeks, and muscular strengthening was allowed 12 weeks after surgery.

We analyzed standard radiographs at yearly intervals for trabecular bony architecture and lucency surrounding the tantalum anchor of the glenoid. Before and after surgery, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores and active forward elevation (AFE) and active external rotation (AER) measurements were recorded. These measurements served as endpoints of analysis.

Results

Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were identified and examined. Mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 6-84 months). In all cases, annual standard radiographs showed bony trabeculae adjacent to the tantalum anchor without lucency. There was no sign of glenoid loosening in any patient.

ASES scores and AFE and AER measurements were obtained with physical examinations and compared with t tests. ASES scores, available for 8 patients, increased from 32 before surgery to 85 after surgery (P < .01). Mean AFE increased from 117° to 159° (P < .01), and mean AER increased from 23° to 53° (P < .01). Figures 3 and 4 show the postoperative radiographs, and the Table highlights the ASES and range-of-motion data.

Discussion

Data for the 12 TSAs followed in this series showed promising outcomes for cementless ingrowth glenoid components. Much as with other data in the literature, there were significant improvements in ASES scores, AFE, and AER. What differs from the majority of available data is the survivorship and lack of radiolucent lines on follow-up radiographs.

 

 

Boileau and colleagues7 randomized 39 patients (40 shoulders) to either a cemented all-polyethylene glenoid or a cementless metal-backed glenoid component. Although the metal-backed glenoid components had a significantly lower rate of radiolucent lines, the metal-backed glenoids had a significantly higher rate of loosening. The authors subsequently abandoned use of uncemented metal-backed glenoid components. Taunton and colleagues8 reviewed 83 TSAs with a metal-backed bone ingrowth glenoid component. In 74 cases, the preoperative diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis. Mean clinical follow-up was 9.5 years. During follow-up, there were improvements in pain, forward elevation, and external rotation. Radiographic glenoid loosening was noted in 33 shoulders; 9 required revision for glenoid loosening. Both series demonstrated a high rate of revisions for cementless glenoid components.

Similar revision difficulties were noted by Montoya and colleagues.9 In their series of 65 TSAs performed for primary osteoarthritis, a cementless glenoid component was implanted. There were significant improvements in Constant scores, forward flexion, external rotation, and abduction but also an 11.3% revision rate noted at 68 months (mean follow-up). Glenoid revisions were required predominantly in patients with eccentric preoperative glenoid morphology. Lawrence and colleagues10 used a cementless ingrowth glenoid component in 21 shoulder arthroplasties performed for glenoid bone loss (13) or revision (8). They noted a high rate of revisions but good outcomes for the cases not revised. In both studies, there was a high rate of revision for glenoid loosening but also a tendency for revisions to be correlated with more challenging clinical applications.

Wirth and colleagues11 followed 44 TSAs using a minimally cemented ingrowth glenoid component. There were significant improvements in ASES scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, and visual analog scale pain ratings. No revisions for glenoid loosening were noted. The implants were thought to provide durable outcomes at a mean follow-up of 4 years. These results were similar to those appreciated in the present study. In both series, the revision rate was much lower than described in the literature, and there were predictable improvements in pain and active motion.

Our study had several limitations: small number of patients, no comparison group, and relatively short follow-up. More long-term data are needed to appropriately compare cemented and uncemented glenoid components. In addition, it is difficult to compare our group of patients with those described in the literature, as the implants used differ. Despite these limitations, our data suggest that tantalum ingrowth glenoid components provide predictable and sustainable outcomes in TSA. With longer-term follow-up, tantalum ingrowth glenoids may demonstrate a durable and reliable alternative to cemented glenoid components.

References

1.    Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):2249-2254.

2.    Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR. Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(6):495-505.

3.    Kasten P, Pape G, Raiss P, et al. Mid-term survivorship analysis of a shoulder replacement with a keeled glenoid and a modern cementing technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92(3):387-392.

4.    Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(10):2279-2292.

5.    Neer CS 2nd, Watson KC, Stanton FJ. Recent experience in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64(3):319-337.

6.    Hollatz MF, Stang A. Nationwide shoulder arthroplasty rates and revision burden in Germany: analysis of the national hospitalization data 2005 to 2006. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(11):e267-e274.

7.    Boileau P, Avidor C, Krishnan SG, Walch G, Kempf JF, Molé D. Cemented polyethylene versus uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(4):351-359.

8.    Taunton MJ, McIntosh AL, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Total shoulder arthroplasty with a metal-backed, bone-ingrowth glenoid component. Medium to long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(10):2180-2188.

9.    Montoya F, Magosch P, Scheiderer B, Lichtenberg S, Melean P, Habermeyer P. Midterm results of a total shoulder prosthesis fixed with a cementless glenoid component. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(5):628-635.

10.  Lawrence TM, Ahmadi S, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Fixation and durability of a bone-ingrowth component for glenoid bone loss. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(12):1764-1769.

11.  Wirth MA, Loredo R, Garcia G, Rockwood CA Jr, Southworth C, Iannotti JP. Total shoulder arthroplasty with an all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component: a clinical and radiographic outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(3):260-267.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Thomas Obermeyer, MD, Paul J. Cagle Jr., MD, Bradford O. Parsons, MD, and Evan L. Flatow, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: Dr. Parsons reports he is a consultant for Arthrex and Zimmer. Dr. Flatow reports he receives royalties from Zimmer and Innomed. Dr. Obermeyer and Dr. Cagle report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E340-E342
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, glenoid, metal-backed, metal, total shoulder arthroplasty, TSA, shoulder, arthroplasty, bone, radiographic, imaging, obermeyer, cagle, parsons, flatow
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Thomas Obermeyer, MD, Paul J. Cagle Jr., MD, Bradford O. Parsons, MD, and Evan L. Flatow, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: Dr. Parsons reports he is a consultant for Arthrex and Zimmer. Dr. Flatow reports he receives royalties from Zimmer and Innomed. Dr. Obermeyer and Dr. Cagle report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Thomas Obermeyer, MD, Paul J. Cagle Jr., MD, Bradford O. Parsons, MD, and Evan L. Flatow, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: Dr. Parsons reports he is a consultant for Arthrex and Zimmer. Dr. Flatow reports he receives royalties from Zimmer and Innomed. Dr. Obermeyer and Dr. Cagle report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is being performed with increasing frequency. According to recent data, the number of TSAs performed annually increased 2.5-fold from 2000 to 2008.1 As more are performed, the need for improved implant survival will increase as well. In particular, advances in glenoid survivorship will be a primary focus. Previous experience has demonstrated that the glenoid component is the most common source of loosening and failure, and glenoid loosening has been documented in 33% to 44% of arthroplasties, with the rate of radiographically lucent lines even higher.2-5 Thus, a correlation between increasing incidence of procedures and high rates of glenoid loosening represents the potential for a significant increase in the number of future revisions. A recent report from Germany indicated that TSA had a 3-fold higher relative burden of revision than hemiarthroplasty.6

Ingrowth metal-backed glenoid components offer the theoretical advantage of bone growth directly into the prosthesis with a single host–prosthesis interface. Use of a novel tantalum glenoid may avoid the stress-shielding, component-stiffness, dissociation, and backside-wear issues that have produced the high failure rates of conventional metal-backed glenoids. According to the literature, the multiple different-style cementless glenoids being used have had unpredictable outcomes and demonstrated an increased need for revisions.7-11

In this article, we present a case series of midterm radiographic and clinical outcomes for TSAs using porous tantalum glenoid components. Our goals were to further understanding of survivorship and complications associated with ingrowth glenoid components and to demonstrate the differences that may occur with use of tantalum.

Materials and Methods

Data were examined for all TSAs performed at a single institution between 2004 and 2013. Before reviewing the data, we obtained approval from the hospital institutional review board. Our retrospective chart review identified all patients who underwent TSA using a tantalum ingrowth glenoid component. Exclusion criteria included revision arthroplasty, use of a non-tantalum glenoid, reverse shoulder arthroplasty, and conversion from hemiarthroplasty to TSA. Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were identified. We obtained patient consent to examine the data collected, and patients were reexamined if they had not been seen within the past 12 months. Figures 1 and 2 show the preoperative radiographs.

The TSAs were performed by 2 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons using glenoid components with porous tantalum anchors (Zimmer). Indications for this procedure were age under 60 years, no prior surgery, and glenoid morphology allowing for version correction without bone grafting. Patients with severe posterior erosion that required bone graft or with a dysplastic glenoid were not indicated for this glenoid implant.

In each case, the anesthesia team placed an indwelling interscalene catheter, and then the surgery was performed with the patient under deep sedation. The beach-chair position and a deltopectoral approach were used, and biceps tendon tenodesis was performed. The subscapularis was elevated with a lesser tuberosity osteotomy and was repaired with nonabsorbable braided suture at the end of the case. During glenoid implantation, the periphery of the polyethylene was cemented. This is consistent with the approved method of implantation for this device. Closed suction drainage was used. After surgery, the patient was restricted to no weight-bearing. During the first 6 weeks, passive forward elevation was allowed to 130° and external rotation to 30°. Active and active-assisted range of motion was started at 6 weeks, and muscular strengthening was allowed 12 weeks after surgery.

We analyzed standard radiographs at yearly intervals for trabecular bony architecture and lucency surrounding the tantalum anchor of the glenoid. Before and after surgery, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores and active forward elevation (AFE) and active external rotation (AER) measurements were recorded. These measurements served as endpoints of analysis.

Results

Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were identified and examined. Mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 6-84 months). In all cases, annual standard radiographs showed bony trabeculae adjacent to the tantalum anchor without lucency. There was no sign of glenoid loosening in any patient.

ASES scores and AFE and AER measurements were obtained with physical examinations and compared with t tests. ASES scores, available for 8 patients, increased from 32 before surgery to 85 after surgery (P < .01). Mean AFE increased from 117° to 159° (P < .01), and mean AER increased from 23° to 53° (P < .01). Figures 3 and 4 show the postoperative radiographs, and the Table highlights the ASES and range-of-motion data.

Discussion

Data for the 12 TSAs followed in this series showed promising outcomes for cementless ingrowth glenoid components. Much as with other data in the literature, there were significant improvements in ASES scores, AFE, and AER. What differs from the majority of available data is the survivorship and lack of radiolucent lines on follow-up radiographs.

 

 

Boileau and colleagues7 randomized 39 patients (40 shoulders) to either a cemented all-polyethylene glenoid or a cementless metal-backed glenoid component. Although the metal-backed glenoid components had a significantly lower rate of radiolucent lines, the metal-backed glenoids had a significantly higher rate of loosening. The authors subsequently abandoned use of uncemented metal-backed glenoid components. Taunton and colleagues8 reviewed 83 TSAs with a metal-backed bone ingrowth glenoid component. In 74 cases, the preoperative diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis. Mean clinical follow-up was 9.5 years. During follow-up, there were improvements in pain, forward elevation, and external rotation. Radiographic glenoid loosening was noted in 33 shoulders; 9 required revision for glenoid loosening. Both series demonstrated a high rate of revisions for cementless glenoid components.

Similar revision difficulties were noted by Montoya and colleagues.9 In their series of 65 TSAs performed for primary osteoarthritis, a cementless glenoid component was implanted. There were significant improvements in Constant scores, forward flexion, external rotation, and abduction but also an 11.3% revision rate noted at 68 months (mean follow-up). Glenoid revisions were required predominantly in patients with eccentric preoperative glenoid morphology. Lawrence and colleagues10 used a cementless ingrowth glenoid component in 21 shoulder arthroplasties performed for glenoid bone loss (13) or revision (8). They noted a high rate of revisions but good outcomes for the cases not revised. In both studies, there was a high rate of revision for glenoid loosening but also a tendency for revisions to be correlated with more challenging clinical applications.

Wirth and colleagues11 followed 44 TSAs using a minimally cemented ingrowth glenoid component. There were significant improvements in ASES scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, and visual analog scale pain ratings. No revisions for glenoid loosening were noted. The implants were thought to provide durable outcomes at a mean follow-up of 4 years. These results were similar to those appreciated in the present study. In both series, the revision rate was much lower than described in the literature, and there were predictable improvements in pain and active motion.

Our study had several limitations: small number of patients, no comparison group, and relatively short follow-up. More long-term data are needed to appropriately compare cemented and uncemented glenoid components. In addition, it is difficult to compare our group of patients with those described in the literature, as the implants used differ. Despite these limitations, our data suggest that tantalum ingrowth glenoid components provide predictable and sustainable outcomes in TSA. With longer-term follow-up, tantalum ingrowth glenoids may demonstrate a durable and reliable alternative to cemented glenoid components.

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is being performed with increasing frequency. According to recent data, the number of TSAs performed annually increased 2.5-fold from 2000 to 2008.1 As more are performed, the need for improved implant survival will increase as well. In particular, advances in glenoid survivorship will be a primary focus. Previous experience has demonstrated that the glenoid component is the most common source of loosening and failure, and glenoid loosening has been documented in 33% to 44% of arthroplasties, with the rate of radiographically lucent lines even higher.2-5 Thus, a correlation between increasing incidence of procedures and high rates of glenoid loosening represents the potential for a significant increase in the number of future revisions. A recent report from Germany indicated that TSA had a 3-fold higher relative burden of revision than hemiarthroplasty.6

Ingrowth metal-backed glenoid components offer the theoretical advantage of bone growth directly into the prosthesis with a single host–prosthesis interface. Use of a novel tantalum glenoid may avoid the stress-shielding, component-stiffness, dissociation, and backside-wear issues that have produced the high failure rates of conventional metal-backed glenoids. According to the literature, the multiple different-style cementless glenoids being used have had unpredictable outcomes and demonstrated an increased need for revisions.7-11

In this article, we present a case series of midterm radiographic and clinical outcomes for TSAs using porous tantalum glenoid components. Our goals were to further understanding of survivorship and complications associated with ingrowth glenoid components and to demonstrate the differences that may occur with use of tantalum.

Materials and Methods

Data were examined for all TSAs performed at a single institution between 2004 and 2013. Before reviewing the data, we obtained approval from the hospital institutional review board. Our retrospective chart review identified all patients who underwent TSA using a tantalum ingrowth glenoid component. Exclusion criteria included revision arthroplasty, use of a non-tantalum glenoid, reverse shoulder arthroplasty, and conversion from hemiarthroplasty to TSA. Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were identified. We obtained patient consent to examine the data collected, and patients were reexamined if they had not been seen within the past 12 months. Figures 1 and 2 show the preoperative radiographs.

The TSAs were performed by 2 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons using glenoid components with porous tantalum anchors (Zimmer). Indications for this procedure were age under 60 years, no prior surgery, and glenoid morphology allowing for version correction without bone grafting. Patients with severe posterior erosion that required bone graft or with a dysplastic glenoid were not indicated for this glenoid implant.

In each case, the anesthesia team placed an indwelling interscalene catheter, and then the surgery was performed with the patient under deep sedation. The beach-chair position and a deltopectoral approach were used, and biceps tendon tenodesis was performed. The subscapularis was elevated with a lesser tuberosity osteotomy and was repaired with nonabsorbable braided suture at the end of the case. During glenoid implantation, the periphery of the polyethylene was cemented. This is consistent with the approved method of implantation for this device. Closed suction drainage was used. After surgery, the patient was restricted to no weight-bearing. During the first 6 weeks, passive forward elevation was allowed to 130° and external rotation to 30°. Active and active-assisted range of motion was started at 6 weeks, and muscular strengthening was allowed 12 weeks after surgery.

We analyzed standard radiographs at yearly intervals for trabecular bony architecture and lucency surrounding the tantalum anchor of the glenoid. Before and after surgery, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores and active forward elevation (AFE) and active external rotation (AER) measurements were recorded. These measurements served as endpoints of analysis.

Results

Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were identified and examined. Mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 6-84 months). In all cases, annual standard radiographs showed bony trabeculae adjacent to the tantalum anchor without lucency. There was no sign of glenoid loosening in any patient.

ASES scores and AFE and AER measurements were obtained with physical examinations and compared with t tests. ASES scores, available for 8 patients, increased from 32 before surgery to 85 after surgery (P < .01). Mean AFE increased from 117° to 159° (P < .01), and mean AER increased from 23° to 53° (P < .01). Figures 3 and 4 show the postoperative radiographs, and the Table highlights the ASES and range-of-motion data.

Discussion

Data for the 12 TSAs followed in this series showed promising outcomes for cementless ingrowth glenoid components. Much as with other data in the literature, there were significant improvements in ASES scores, AFE, and AER. What differs from the majority of available data is the survivorship and lack of radiolucent lines on follow-up radiographs.

 

 

Boileau and colleagues7 randomized 39 patients (40 shoulders) to either a cemented all-polyethylene glenoid or a cementless metal-backed glenoid component. Although the metal-backed glenoid components had a significantly lower rate of radiolucent lines, the metal-backed glenoids had a significantly higher rate of loosening. The authors subsequently abandoned use of uncemented metal-backed glenoid components. Taunton and colleagues8 reviewed 83 TSAs with a metal-backed bone ingrowth glenoid component. In 74 cases, the preoperative diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis. Mean clinical follow-up was 9.5 years. During follow-up, there were improvements in pain, forward elevation, and external rotation. Radiographic glenoid loosening was noted in 33 shoulders; 9 required revision for glenoid loosening. Both series demonstrated a high rate of revisions for cementless glenoid components.

Similar revision difficulties were noted by Montoya and colleagues.9 In their series of 65 TSAs performed for primary osteoarthritis, a cementless glenoid component was implanted. There were significant improvements in Constant scores, forward flexion, external rotation, and abduction but also an 11.3% revision rate noted at 68 months (mean follow-up). Glenoid revisions were required predominantly in patients with eccentric preoperative glenoid morphology. Lawrence and colleagues10 used a cementless ingrowth glenoid component in 21 shoulder arthroplasties performed for glenoid bone loss (13) or revision (8). They noted a high rate of revisions but good outcomes for the cases not revised. In both studies, there was a high rate of revision for glenoid loosening but also a tendency for revisions to be correlated with more challenging clinical applications.

Wirth and colleagues11 followed 44 TSAs using a minimally cemented ingrowth glenoid component. There were significant improvements in ASES scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, and visual analog scale pain ratings. No revisions for glenoid loosening were noted. The implants were thought to provide durable outcomes at a mean follow-up of 4 years. These results were similar to those appreciated in the present study. In both series, the revision rate was much lower than described in the literature, and there were predictable improvements in pain and active motion.

Our study had several limitations: small number of patients, no comparison group, and relatively short follow-up. More long-term data are needed to appropriately compare cemented and uncemented glenoid components. In addition, it is difficult to compare our group of patients with those described in the literature, as the implants used differ. Despite these limitations, our data suggest that tantalum ingrowth glenoid components provide predictable and sustainable outcomes in TSA. With longer-term follow-up, tantalum ingrowth glenoids may demonstrate a durable and reliable alternative to cemented glenoid components.

References

1.    Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):2249-2254.

2.    Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR. Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(6):495-505.

3.    Kasten P, Pape G, Raiss P, et al. Mid-term survivorship analysis of a shoulder replacement with a keeled glenoid and a modern cementing technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92(3):387-392.

4.    Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(10):2279-2292.

5.    Neer CS 2nd, Watson KC, Stanton FJ. Recent experience in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64(3):319-337.

6.    Hollatz MF, Stang A. Nationwide shoulder arthroplasty rates and revision burden in Germany: analysis of the national hospitalization data 2005 to 2006. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(11):e267-e274.

7.    Boileau P, Avidor C, Krishnan SG, Walch G, Kempf JF, Molé D. Cemented polyethylene versus uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(4):351-359.

8.    Taunton MJ, McIntosh AL, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Total shoulder arthroplasty with a metal-backed, bone-ingrowth glenoid component. Medium to long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(10):2180-2188.

9.    Montoya F, Magosch P, Scheiderer B, Lichtenberg S, Melean P, Habermeyer P. Midterm results of a total shoulder prosthesis fixed with a cementless glenoid component. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(5):628-635.

10.  Lawrence TM, Ahmadi S, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Fixation and durability of a bone-ingrowth component for glenoid bone loss. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(12):1764-1769.

11.  Wirth MA, Loredo R, Garcia G, Rockwood CA Jr, Southworth C, Iannotti JP. Total shoulder arthroplasty with an all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component: a clinical and radiographic outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(3):260-267.

References

1.    Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):2249-2254.

2.    Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR. Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(6):495-505.

3.    Kasten P, Pape G, Raiss P, et al. Mid-term survivorship analysis of a shoulder replacement with a keeled glenoid and a modern cementing technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92(3):387-392.

4.    Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(10):2279-2292.

5.    Neer CS 2nd, Watson KC, Stanton FJ. Recent experience in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64(3):319-337.

6.    Hollatz MF, Stang A. Nationwide shoulder arthroplasty rates and revision burden in Germany: analysis of the national hospitalization data 2005 to 2006. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(11):e267-e274.

7.    Boileau P, Avidor C, Krishnan SG, Walch G, Kempf JF, Molé D. Cemented polyethylene versus uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(4):351-359.

8.    Taunton MJ, McIntosh AL, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Total shoulder arthroplasty with a metal-backed, bone-ingrowth glenoid component. Medium to long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(10):2180-2188.

9.    Montoya F, Magosch P, Scheiderer B, Lichtenberg S, Melean P, Habermeyer P. Midterm results of a total shoulder prosthesis fixed with a cementless glenoid component. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(5):628-635.

10.  Lawrence TM, Ahmadi S, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Fixation and durability of a bone-ingrowth component for glenoid bone loss. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(12):1764-1769.

11.  Wirth MA, Loredo R, Garcia G, Rockwood CA Jr, Southworth C, Iannotti JP. Total shoulder arthroplasty with an all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component: a clinical and radiographic outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(3):260-267.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Page Number
E340-E342
Page Number
E340-E342
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Midterm Follow-Up of Metal-Backed Glenoid Components in Anatomical Total Shoulder Arthroplasties
Display Headline
Midterm Follow-Up of Metal-Backed Glenoid Components in Anatomical Total Shoulder Arthroplasties
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, glenoid, metal-backed, metal, total shoulder arthroplasty, TSA, shoulder, arthroplasty, bone, radiographic, imaging, obermeyer, cagle, parsons, flatow
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, glenoid, metal-backed, metal, total shoulder arthroplasty, TSA, shoulder, arthroplasty, bone, radiographic, imaging, obermeyer, cagle, parsons, flatow
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

The Role of Computed Tomography in Evaluating Intra-Articular Distal Humerus Fractures

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:32
Display Headline
The Role of Computed Tomography in Evaluating Intra-Articular Distal Humerus Fractures

Elbow fractures constitute 7% of all adult fractures, and 30% of these fractures are distal humerus fractures.1,2 Of these, 96% involve disruption of the articular surface.3 Intra-articular distal humerus fracture patterns can be difficult to characterize on plain radiographs, and therefore computed tomography (CT) is often used. The surgeon’s understanding of the fracture pattern and the deforming forces affects choice of surgical approach. In particular, multiplanar fracture patterns, including coronal shear fractures of the capitellum or trochlea, are often difficult to recognize on plain radiographs. Identification of a multiplanar fracture pattern may require a change in approach or fixation. CT is useful for other intra-articular fractures, such as those of the proximal humerus,3-6 but involves increased radiation and cost.

We conducted a study to determine the effect of adding CT evaluation to plain radiographic evaluation on the classification of, and treatment plans for, intra-articular distal humerus fractures. We hypothesized that adding CT images to plain radiographs would change the classification and treatment of these fractures and would improve interobserver agreement on classification and treatment.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining University of Southern California Institutional Review Board approval, we retrospectively studied 30 consecutive cases of adult intra-articular distal humerus fractures treated by Dr. Itamura at a level I trauma center between 1995 and 2008. In each case, the injured elbow was imaged with plain radiography and CT. Multiple machines were used for CT, but all according to the radiology department’s standard protocol. The images were evaluated by 9 independent observers from the same institution: 3 orthopedic surgeons (1 fellowship-trained shoulder/elbow subspecialist, 1 fellowship-trained upper extremity subspecialist, 1 fellowship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeon), 3 shoulder/elbow fellows, and 3 senior residents pursuing upper extremity fellowships on graduation. No observer was involved in the care of any of the patients. All identifying details were removed from the patient information presented to the observers. For each set of images, the observer was asked to classify the fractures according to the Mehne and Matta classification system,7,8 which is the predominant system used at our institution.

Diagrams of this classification system were provided, but there was no formal observer training or calibration. Seven treatment options were presented: (1) open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using a posterior approach with olecranon osteotomy, (2) ORIF using a posterior approach, (3) ORIF using a lateral approach, (4) ORIF using a medial approach, (5) ORIF using an anterior/anterolateral approach, (6) total elbow arthroplasty, and (7) nonoperative management. The only clinical data provided were patient age and sex.

Images were evaluated in blinded fashion. Two rounds of evaluation were compared. In round 1, plain radiographs were evaluated; in round 2, the same radiographs plus corresponding 2-dimensional (2-D) CT images. A minimum of 1 month was required between viewing rounds.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed by the Statistical Consultation and Research Center at our institution. Cohen κ was calculated to estimate the reliability of the fracture classification and treatment plan made by different observers on the same occasion (interobserver reliability). Cramer V9 was calculated to estimate the reliability of the fracture classification and treatment plan made by the same observer on separate occasions (intraobserver reliability). It measures the association between the 2 ratings as a percentage of their total variation. The κ value and Cramer V value were also used to evaluate results based on the observers’ training levels. Both κ and Cramer V values are interpreted as follows: .00 to .20 indicates slight agreement; .21 to .40, fair agreement; .41-.60, moderate agreement; .61 to .80, substantial agreement; and ≥.81, almost perfect agreement. Zero represents no agreement, and 1.00 represents perfect agreement.

Results

Overall intraobserver reliability for classification was fair (.393). It was moderate for the treatment plan (.426) between viewing rounds. Residents had the highest Cramer V value at .60 (moderate) for classification reliability, and attending surgeons had the highest value at .52 (moderate) for treatment plan. All 3 groups (residents, fellows, attending surgeons) showed moderate intraobserver agreement for treatment plan (Table 1).

Interobserver reliability did not improve with the addition of CT in round 2. Reliability was fair at both viewing rounds for classification and for treatment. For classification, the overall κ value was .21 for the first round and .20 for the second round. For treatment plan, the overall κ value was .28 for the first round and .27 for the second round. Attending surgeons decreased in agreement with regard to treatment plan with the addition of CT (.46, moderate, to .32, fair). Fellows had only slight agreement for both rounds with regard to classification as well as treatment (Table 2).

 

 

ORIF using a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy was the most common choice of treatment method overall at both time points (58.1% and 63.7%) and was still the most common choice when each group of observers (residents, fellows, faculty) was considered separately (Figure 1).

When classifying the fractures, attending surgeons chose the multiplanar fracture pattern 25.6% of the time when viewing radiographs only, and remained consistent in choosing this pattern 23.3% of the time when CT was added to radiographs. Fellows and residents chose this fracture pattern much less often (8.9% and 7.8%, respectively) when viewing radiographs only. Both fellows and residents increased their choice of the multiplanar fracture pattern by 10% (18.9% for fellows, 17.8% for residents) when CT was added (Figure 2).

Overall, the recognition of a multiplanar fracture pattern increased when CT was added. On 30 occasions, an answer was changed from another classification pattern to the multiplanar pattern when CT was added. Only 6 times did an observer change a multiplanar pattern selection at round 1 to another choice at round 2.

Adding CT in round 2 changed the treatment plan for multiplanar fractures. At round 1, 73.7% chose ORIF using a lateral approach for treatment of the multiplanar fracture versus 10.5% who chose ORIF using a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy. The choice of the posterior approach with olecranon osteotomy increased to 51.9% at round 2, using the technique we have previously described.5,10

Overall intraobserver reliability for classification was fair (.393). It was moderate for the treatment plan (.426) between viewing rounds. Residents had the highest Cramer V value at .60 (moderate) for classification reliability, and faculty had the highest value at .52 (moderate) for treatment plan. All 3 groups (residents, fellows, attending surgeons) showed moderate intraobserver agreement for treatment plan (Table 1).

Interobserver reliability did not improve with the addition of CT in round 2. Reliability for classification was fair for round 1 and slight for round 2. Reliability was fair at both viewing rounds for treatment. For classification, the overall κ value was .21 for round 1 and .20 for round 2. For treatment plan, the overall κ value was .28 for round 1 and .27 for round 2. Attending surgeons decreased in agreement with regard to treatment plan with the addition of CT (.46, moderate, to .32, fair). Fellows had only slight agreement for both rounds with regard to classification as well as treatment (Table 2).

Discussion

In this study, CT changed both classification and treatment when added to plain radiographs. Interestingly, interobserver reliability did not improve for classification or treatment with the addition of CT. This finding suggests substantial disagreement among qualified observers that is not resolved with more sophisticated imaging. We propose this disagreement is caused by differences in training and experience with specific fracture patterns and surgical approaches.

Our fair to moderate interobserver reliability using radiographs only is consistent with a study by Wainwright and colleagues,11 who demonstrated fair to moderate interobserver reliability with radiographs only using 3 different classification systems. CT did not improve interobserver reliability in the present study.

To our knowledge, the effect of adding CT to plain radiographs on classification and treatment plan has not been evaluated. Doornberg and colleagues2 evaluated the effect of adding 3-dimensional (3-D) CT to a combination of radiographs and 2-D CT. Using the AO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen) classification12 and the classification system of Mehne and Matta, they found that 3-D CT improved intraobserver and interobserver reliability for classification but improved only intraobserver agreement for treatment. Interobserver agreement for treatment plan remained fair. In parallel with their study, fracture classification in our study was more often changed with CT than the treatment plan was. Training level appeared not to affect this finding. We found fair interobserver agreement for treatment choice as well, which was not improved by adding CT. Doornberg and colleagues2 concluded that the “relatively small added expense of three-dimensional computed tomography scans seems worthwhile.”

When evaluating specific fracture patterns in the Mehne and Matta classification system, we observed that less experienced surgeons (residents, fellows) were much more likely to identify multiplanar fracture patterns with the aid of CT. Use of CT did not change attending surgeons’ recognition of these multiplanar fractures, suggesting that the faculty were more capable of appreciating these fracture patterns with radiographs only (Figure 3). We also observed that adding CT changed the predominant treatment plan for multiplanar fractures from a lateral approach to a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy. Failure to appreciate this component of the fracture before surgery could lead to an increased intraoperative difficulty level. Failure to appreciate it during surgery could lead to unexpected postoperative displacement and ultimately poorer outcome.

 

 

There are limitations to our study. There is no gold standard for assessing the accuracy of classification decisions. Intraoperative classification could have served as a gold standard, but the fractures were not routinely assigned a classification during surgery. Brouwer and colleagues13 evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CT (including 3-D CT) with intraoperative AO classification as a reference point and found improvement in intraobserver agreement but not interobserver agreement when describing fracture characteristics—and no significant effect on classification.

We used a single classification system, the one primarily used at our institution and by Dr. Itamura. There are many systems,7,12,14 all with their strengths and weaknesses, and no one system is used universally. Adding a system would have allowed us to compare results of more than one system. Our aim, however, was to keep our form simple for the sake of participation and completion of the viewings by each volunteer.

Only 2-D CT was used for this study, as 3-D images were not available for all patients. Although this is a potential weakness, it appears that, based on the study by Doornberg and colleagues,2 adding 3-D imaging resulted in only modest improvement in the reliability of classification and no significant improvement in agreement on treatment recommendation.

In addition, our results were likely biased by the fact that 8 of the 9 evaluators were trained by Dr. Itamura, who very often uses a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy for internal fixation of distal humerus intra-articular fractures, as previously described.8,10 Therefore, selection of this treatment option may have been overestimated in this study. Nevertheless, after reviewing the literature, Ljungquist and colleagues15 wrote, “There do not seem to be superior functional results associated with any one surgical approach to the distal humerus.”

We did not give the evaluators an indication of patients’ activity demands (only age and sex), which may have been relevant when considering total elbow arthroplasty.

Last, performing another round of evaluations with only plain radiographs, before introducing CT, would have provided intraobserver reliability results on plain radiograph evaluation, which could have been compared with intraobserver reliability when CT was added. Again, this was excluded to encourage participation and create the least cumbersome evaluation experience possible, which was thought appropriate, as this information is already in the literature.

Conclusion

Adding CT changed classifications and treatment plans. Raters were more likely to change their classifications than their treatment plans. The addition of CT did not increase agreement between observers. Despite the added radiation and cost, we recommend performing CT for all intra-articular distal humerus fractures because it improves understanding of the fracture pattern and affects treatment planning, especially for fractures with a coronal shear component, which is often not appreciated on plain radiographs.

References

1.    Anglen J. Distal humerus. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13(5):291-297.

2.    Doornberg J, Lindenhovius A, Kloen P, van Dijk CN, Zurakowski D, Ring D. Two and three-dimensional computed tomography for the classification and management of distal humerus fractures. Evaluation of reliability and diagnostic accuracy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(8):1795-1801.

3.    Pollock JW, Faber KJ, Athwal GS. Distal humerus fractures. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39(2):187-200.

4.    Castagno AA, Shuman WP, Kilcoyne RF, Haynor DR, Morris ME, Matsen FA. Complex fractures of the proximal humerus: role of CT in treatment. Radiology. 1987;165(3):759-762.

5.    Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, Parkkari J. Secular trends in the osteoporotic fractures of the distal humerus in elderly women. Eur J Epidemiol. 1998;14(2):159-164.

6.    Siebenrock KA, Gerber C. The reproducibility of classification of fractures of the proximal end of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(12):1751-1755.

7.    Jupiter JB, Mehne DK. Fractures of the distal humerus. Orthopedics. 1992;15(7):825-833.

8.    Zalavras CG, McAllister ET, Singh A, Itamura JM. Operative treatment of intra-articular distal humerus fractures. Am J Orthop. 2007;36(12 suppl):8-12.

9.    Cramer H. Mathematical Methods of Statistics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1946.

10.  Panossian V, Zalavras C, Mirzayan R, Itamura JM. Intra-articular distal humerus fractures. In: Mirzayan R, Itamura JM, eds. Shoulder and Elbow Trauma. New York, NY: Thieme; 2004:67-78.

11.  Wainwright AM, Williams JR, Carr AJ. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in classification systems for fractures of the distal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82(5):636-642.

12.  Müller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P, Schatzker J. The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures in Long Bones. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1990.

13.  Brouwer KM, Lindenhovius AL, Dyer GS, Zurakowski D, Mudgal C, Ring D. Diagnostic accuracy of 2- and 3-dimensional imaging and modeling of distal humerus fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(6):772-776.

14.  Riseborough EJ, Radin EL. Intercondylar T fractures of the humerus in the adult. A comparison of operative and non-operative treatment in 29 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(1):130-141.

15.  Ljungquist KL, Beran MC, Awan H. Effects of surgical approach on functional outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation of intra-articular distal humeral fractures: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(1):126-135.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Betsy M. Nolan, MD, Stephan J. Sweet, MD, MPH, Eric Ferkel, MD, Aniebiet-Abasi Udofia, MD, MBA, and John Itamura, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E326-E330
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, computed tomography, CT, imaging, humerus fractures, fractures, fracture management, trauma, fracture, humerus, distal humerus, radiographic, arm, nolan, sweet, ferkel, udofia, itamura
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Betsy M. Nolan, MD, Stephan J. Sweet, MD, MPH, Eric Ferkel, MD, Aniebiet-Abasi Udofia, MD, MBA, and John Itamura, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Betsy M. Nolan, MD, Stephan J. Sweet, MD, MPH, Eric Ferkel, MD, Aniebiet-Abasi Udofia, MD, MBA, and John Itamura, MD

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Elbow fractures constitute 7% of all adult fractures, and 30% of these fractures are distal humerus fractures.1,2 Of these, 96% involve disruption of the articular surface.3 Intra-articular distal humerus fracture patterns can be difficult to characterize on plain radiographs, and therefore computed tomography (CT) is often used. The surgeon’s understanding of the fracture pattern and the deforming forces affects choice of surgical approach. In particular, multiplanar fracture patterns, including coronal shear fractures of the capitellum or trochlea, are often difficult to recognize on plain radiographs. Identification of a multiplanar fracture pattern may require a change in approach or fixation. CT is useful for other intra-articular fractures, such as those of the proximal humerus,3-6 but involves increased radiation and cost.

We conducted a study to determine the effect of adding CT evaluation to plain radiographic evaluation on the classification of, and treatment plans for, intra-articular distal humerus fractures. We hypothesized that adding CT images to plain radiographs would change the classification and treatment of these fractures and would improve interobserver agreement on classification and treatment.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining University of Southern California Institutional Review Board approval, we retrospectively studied 30 consecutive cases of adult intra-articular distal humerus fractures treated by Dr. Itamura at a level I trauma center between 1995 and 2008. In each case, the injured elbow was imaged with plain radiography and CT. Multiple machines were used for CT, but all according to the radiology department’s standard protocol. The images were evaluated by 9 independent observers from the same institution: 3 orthopedic surgeons (1 fellowship-trained shoulder/elbow subspecialist, 1 fellowship-trained upper extremity subspecialist, 1 fellowship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeon), 3 shoulder/elbow fellows, and 3 senior residents pursuing upper extremity fellowships on graduation. No observer was involved in the care of any of the patients. All identifying details were removed from the patient information presented to the observers. For each set of images, the observer was asked to classify the fractures according to the Mehne and Matta classification system,7,8 which is the predominant system used at our institution.

Diagrams of this classification system were provided, but there was no formal observer training or calibration. Seven treatment options were presented: (1) open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using a posterior approach with olecranon osteotomy, (2) ORIF using a posterior approach, (3) ORIF using a lateral approach, (4) ORIF using a medial approach, (5) ORIF using an anterior/anterolateral approach, (6) total elbow arthroplasty, and (7) nonoperative management. The only clinical data provided were patient age and sex.

Images were evaluated in blinded fashion. Two rounds of evaluation were compared. In round 1, plain radiographs were evaluated; in round 2, the same radiographs plus corresponding 2-dimensional (2-D) CT images. A minimum of 1 month was required between viewing rounds.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed by the Statistical Consultation and Research Center at our institution. Cohen κ was calculated to estimate the reliability of the fracture classification and treatment plan made by different observers on the same occasion (interobserver reliability). Cramer V9 was calculated to estimate the reliability of the fracture classification and treatment plan made by the same observer on separate occasions (intraobserver reliability). It measures the association between the 2 ratings as a percentage of their total variation. The κ value and Cramer V value were also used to evaluate results based on the observers’ training levels. Both κ and Cramer V values are interpreted as follows: .00 to .20 indicates slight agreement; .21 to .40, fair agreement; .41-.60, moderate agreement; .61 to .80, substantial agreement; and ≥.81, almost perfect agreement. Zero represents no agreement, and 1.00 represents perfect agreement.

Results

Overall intraobserver reliability for classification was fair (.393). It was moderate for the treatment plan (.426) between viewing rounds. Residents had the highest Cramer V value at .60 (moderate) for classification reliability, and attending surgeons had the highest value at .52 (moderate) for treatment plan. All 3 groups (residents, fellows, attending surgeons) showed moderate intraobserver agreement for treatment plan (Table 1).

Interobserver reliability did not improve with the addition of CT in round 2. Reliability was fair at both viewing rounds for classification and for treatment. For classification, the overall κ value was .21 for the first round and .20 for the second round. For treatment plan, the overall κ value was .28 for the first round and .27 for the second round. Attending surgeons decreased in agreement with regard to treatment plan with the addition of CT (.46, moderate, to .32, fair). Fellows had only slight agreement for both rounds with regard to classification as well as treatment (Table 2).

 

 

ORIF using a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy was the most common choice of treatment method overall at both time points (58.1% and 63.7%) and was still the most common choice when each group of observers (residents, fellows, faculty) was considered separately (Figure 1).

When classifying the fractures, attending surgeons chose the multiplanar fracture pattern 25.6% of the time when viewing radiographs only, and remained consistent in choosing this pattern 23.3% of the time when CT was added to radiographs. Fellows and residents chose this fracture pattern much less often (8.9% and 7.8%, respectively) when viewing radiographs only. Both fellows and residents increased their choice of the multiplanar fracture pattern by 10% (18.9% for fellows, 17.8% for residents) when CT was added (Figure 2).

Overall, the recognition of a multiplanar fracture pattern increased when CT was added. On 30 occasions, an answer was changed from another classification pattern to the multiplanar pattern when CT was added. Only 6 times did an observer change a multiplanar pattern selection at round 1 to another choice at round 2.

Adding CT in round 2 changed the treatment plan for multiplanar fractures. At round 1, 73.7% chose ORIF using a lateral approach for treatment of the multiplanar fracture versus 10.5% who chose ORIF using a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy. The choice of the posterior approach with olecranon osteotomy increased to 51.9% at round 2, using the technique we have previously described.5,10

Overall intraobserver reliability for classification was fair (.393). It was moderate for the treatment plan (.426) between viewing rounds. Residents had the highest Cramer V value at .60 (moderate) for classification reliability, and faculty had the highest value at .52 (moderate) for treatment plan. All 3 groups (residents, fellows, attending surgeons) showed moderate intraobserver agreement for treatment plan (Table 1).

Interobserver reliability did not improve with the addition of CT in round 2. Reliability for classification was fair for round 1 and slight for round 2. Reliability was fair at both viewing rounds for treatment. For classification, the overall κ value was .21 for round 1 and .20 for round 2. For treatment plan, the overall κ value was .28 for round 1 and .27 for round 2. Attending surgeons decreased in agreement with regard to treatment plan with the addition of CT (.46, moderate, to .32, fair). Fellows had only slight agreement for both rounds with regard to classification as well as treatment (Table 2).

Discussion

In this study, CT changed both classification and treatment when added to plain radiographs. Interestingly, interobserver reliability did not improve for classification or treatment with the addition of CT. This finding suggests substantial disagreement among qualified observers that is not resolved with more sophisticated imaging. We propose this disagreement is caused by differences in training and experience with specific fracture patterns and surgical approaches.

Our fair to moderate interobserver reliability using radiographs only is consistent with a study by Wainwright and colleagues,11 who demonstrated fair to moderate interobserver reliability with radiographs only using 3 different classification systems. CT did not improve interobserver reliability in the present study.

To our knowledge, the effect of adding CT to plain radiographs on classification and treatment plan has not been evaluated. Doornberg and colleagues2 evaluated the effect of adding 3-dimensional (3-D) CT to a combination of radiographs and 2-D CT. Using the AO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen) classification12 and the classification system of Mehne and Matta, they found that 3-D CT improved intraobserver and interobserver reliability for classification but improved only intraobserver agreement for treatment. Interobserver agreement for treatment plan remained fair. In parallel with their study, fracture classification in our study was more often changed with CT than the treatment plan was. Training level appeared not to affect this finding. We found fair interobserver agreement for treatment choice as well, which was not improved by adding CT. Doornberg and colleagues2 concluded that the “relatively small added expense of three-dimensional computed tomography scans seems worthwhile.”

When evaluating specific fracture patterns in the Mehne and Matta classification system, we observed that less experienced surgeons (residents, fellows) were much more likely to identify multiplanar fracture patterns with the aid of CT. Use of CT did not change attending surgeons’ recognition of these multiplanar fractures, suggesting that the faculty were more capable of appreciating these fracture patterns with radiographs only (Figure 3). We also observed that adding CT changed the predominant treatment plan for multiplanar fractures from a lateral approach to a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy. Failure to appreciate this component of the fracture before surgery could lead to an increased intraoperative difficulty level. Failure to appreciate it during surgery could lead to unexpected postoperative displacement and ultimately poorer outcome.

 

 

There are limitations to our study. There is no gold standard for assessing the accuracy of classification decisions. Intraoperative classification could have served as a gold standard, but the fractures were not routinely assigned a classification during surgery. Brouwer and colleagues13 evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CT (including 3-D CT) with intraoperative AO classification as a reference point and found improvement in intraobserver agreement but not interobserver agreement when describing fracture characteristics—and no significant effect on classification.

We used a single classification system, the one primarily used at our institution and by Dr. Itamura. There are many systems,7,12,14 all with their strengths and weaknesses, and no one system is used universally. Adding a system would have allowed us to compare results of more than one system. Our aim, however, was to keep our form simple for the sake of participation and completion of the viewings by each volunteer.

Only 2-D CT was used for this study, as 3-D images were not available for all patients. Although this is a potential weakness, it appears that, based on the study by Doornberg and colleagues,2 adding 3-D imaging resulted in only modest improvement in the reliability of classification and no significant improvement in agreement on treatment recommendation.

In addition, our results were likely biased by the fact that 8 of the 9 evaluators were trained by Dr. Itamura, who very often uses a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy for internal fixation of distal humerus intra-articular fractures, as previously described.8,10 Therefore, selection of this treatment option may have been overestimated in this study. Nevertheless, after reviewing the literature, Ljungquist and colleagues15 wrote, “There do not seem to be superior functional results associated with any one surgical approach to the distal humerus.”

We did not give the evaluators an indication of patients’ activity demands (only age and sex), which may have been relevant when considering total elbow arthroplasty.

Last, performing another round of evaluations with only plain radiographs, before introducing CT, would have provided intraobserver reliability results on plain radiograph evaluation, which could have been compared with intraobserver reliability when CT was added. Again, this was excluded to encourage participation and create the least cumbersome evaluation experience possible, which was thought appropriate, as this information is already in the literature.

Conclusion

Adding CT changed classifications and treatment plans. Raters were more likely to change their classifications than their treatment plans. The addition of CT did not increase agreement between observers. Despite the added radiation and cost, we recommend performing CT for all intra-articular distal humerus fractures because it improves understanding of the fracture pattern and affects treatment planning, especially for fractures with a coronal shear component, which is often not appreciated on plain radiographs.

Elbow fractures constitute 7% of all adult fractures, and 30% of these fractures are distal humerus fractures.1,2 Of these, 96% involve disruption of the articular surface.3 Intra-articular distal humerus fracture patterns can be difficult to characterize on plain radiographs, and therefore computed tomography (CT) is often used. The surgeon’s understanding of the fracture pattern and the deforming forces affects choice of surgical approach. In particular, multiplanar fracture patterns, including coronal shear fractures of the capitellum or trochlea, are often difficult to recognize on plain radiographs. Identification of a multiplanar fracture pattern may require a change in approach or fixation. CT is useful for other intra-articular fractures, such as those of the proximal humerus,3-6 but involves increased radiation and cost.

We conducted a study to determine the effect of adding CT evaluation to plain radiographic evaluation on the classification of, and treatment plans for, intra-articular distal humerus fractures. We hypothesized that adding CT images to plain radiographs would change the classification and treatment of these fractures and would improve interobserver agreement on classification and treatment.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining University of Southern California Institutional Review Board approval, we retrospectively studied 30 consecutive cases of adult intra-articular distal humerus fractures treated by Dr. Itamura at a level I trauma center between 1995 and 2008. In each case, the injured elbow was imaged with plain radiography and CT. Multiple machines were used for CT, but all according to the radiology department’s standard protocol. The images were evaluated by 9 independent observers from the same institution: 3 orthopedic surgeons (1 fellowship-trained shoulder/elbow subspecialist, 1 fellowship-trained upper extremity subspecialist, 1 fellowship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeon), 3 shoulder/elbow fellows, and 3 senior residents pursuing upper extremity fellowships on graduation. No observer was involved in the care of any of the patients. All identifying details were removed from the patient information presented to the observers. For each set of images, the observer was asked to classify the fractures according to the Mehne and Matta classification system,7,8 which is the predominant system used at our institution.

Diagrams of this classification system were provided, but there was no formal observer training or calibration. Seven treatment options were presented: (1) open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using a posterior approach with olecranon osteotomy, (2) ORIF using a posterior approach, (3) ORIF using a lateral approach, (4) ORIF using a medial approach, (5) ORIF using an anterior/anterolateral approach, (6) total elbow arthroplasty, and (7) nonoperative management. The only clinical data provided were patient age and sex.

Images were evaluated in blinded fashion. Two rounds of evaluation were compared. In round 1, plain radiographs were evaluated; in round 2, the same radiographs plus corresponding 2-dimensional (2-D) CT images. A minimum of 1 month was required between viewing rounds.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed by the Statistical Consultation and Research Center at our institution. Cohen κ was calculated to estimate the reliability of the fracture classification and treatment plan made by different observers on the same occasion (interobserver reliability). Cramer V9 was calculated to estimate the reliability of the fracture classification and treatment plan made by the same observer on separate occasions (intraobserver reliability). It measures the association between the 2 ratings as a percentage of their total variation. The κ value and Cramer V value were also used to evaluate results based on the observers’ training levels. Both κ and Cramer V values are interpreted as follows: .00 to .20 indicates slight agreement; .21 to .40, fair agreement; .41-.60, moderate agreement; .61 to .80, substantial agreement; and ≥.81, almost perfect agreement. Zero represents no agreement, and 1.00 represents perfect agreement.

Results

Overall intraobserver reliability for classification was fair (.393). It was moderate for the treatment plan (.426) between viewing rounds. Residents had the highest Cramer V value at .60 (moderate) for classification reliability, and attending surgeons had the highest value at .52 (moderate) for treatment plan. All 3 groups (residents, fellows, attending surgeons) showed moderate intraobserver agreement for treatment plan (Table 1).

Interobserver reliability did not improve with the addition of CT in round 2. Reliability was fair at both viewing rounds for classification and for treatment. For classification, the overall κ value was .21 for the first round and .20 for the second round. For treatment plan, the overall κ value was .28 for the first round and .27 for the second round. Attending surgeons decreased in agreement with regard to treatment plan with the addition of CT (.46, moderate, to .32, fair). Fellows had only slight agreement for both rounds with regard to classification as well as treatment (Table 2).

 

 

ORIF using a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy was the most common choice of treatment method overall at both time points (58.1% and 63.7%) and was still the most common choice when each group of observers (residents, fellows, faculty) was considered separately (Figure 1).

When classifying the fractures, attending surgeons chose the multiplanar fracture pattern 25.6% of the time when viewing radiographs only, and remained consistent in choosing this pattern 23.3% of the time when CT was added to radiographs. Fellows and residents chose this fracture pattern much less often (8.9% and 7.8%, respectively) when viewing radiographs only. Both fellows and residents increased their choice of the multiplanar fracture pattern by 10% (18.9% for fellows, 17.8% for residents) when CT was added (Figure 2).

Overall, the recognition of a multiplanar fracture pattern increased when CT was added. On 30 occasions, an answer was changed from another classification pattern to the multiplanar pattern when CT was added. Only 6 times did an observer change a multiplanar pattern selection at round 1 to another choice at round 2.

Adding CT in round 2 changed the treatment plan for multiplanar fractures. At round 1, 73.7% chose ORIF using a lateral approach for treatment of the multiplanar fracture versus 10.5% who chose ORIF using a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy. The choice of the posterior approach with olecranon osteotomy increased to 51.9% at round 2, using the technique we have previously described.5,10

Overall intraobserver reliability for classification was fair (.393). It was moderate for the treatment plan (.426) between viewing rounds. Residents had the highest Cramer V value at .60 (moderate) for classification reliability, and faculty had the highest value at .52 (moderate) for treatment plan. All 3 groups (residents, fellows, attending surgeons) showed moderate intraobserver agreement for treatment plan (Table 1).

Interobserver reliability did not improve with the addition of CT in round 2. Reliability for classification was fair for round 1 and slight for round 2. Reliability was fair at both viewing rounds for treatment. For classification, the overall κ value was .21 for round 1 and .20 for round 2. For treatment plan, the overall κ value was .28 for round 1 and .27 for round 2. Attending surgeons decreased in agreement with regard to treatment plan with the addition of CT (.46, moderate, to .32, fair). Fellows had only slight agreement for both rounds with regard to classification as well as treatment (Table 2).

Discussion

In this study, CT changed both classification and treatment when added to plain radiographs. Interestingly, interobserver reliability did not improve for classification or treatment with the addition of CT. This finding suggests substantial disagreement among qualified observers that is not resolved with more sophisticated imaging. We propose this disagreement is caused by differences in training and experience with specific fracture patterns and surgical approaches.

Our fair to moderate interobserver reliability using radiographs only is consistent with a study by Wainwright and colleagues,11 who demonstrated fair to moderate interobserver reliability with radiographs only using 3 different classification systems. CT did not improve interobserver reliability in the present study.

To our knowledge, the effect of adding CT to plain radiographs on classification and treatment plan has not been evaluated. Doornberg and colleagues2 evaluated the effect of adding 3-dimensional (3-D) CT to a combination of radiographs and 2-D CT. Using the AO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen) classification12 and the classification system of Mehne and Matta, they found that 3-D CT improved intraobserver and interobserver reliability for classification but improved only intraobserver agreement for treatment. Interobserver agreement for treatment plan remained fair. In parallel with their study, fracture classification in our study was more often changed with CT than the treatment plan was. Training level appeared not to affect this finding. We found fair interobserver agreement for treatment choice as well, which was not improved by adding CT. Doornberg and colleagues2 concluded that the “relatively small added expense of three-dimensional computed tomography scans seems worthwhile.”

When evaluating specific fracture patterns in the Mehne and Matta classification system, we observed that less experienced surgeons (residents, fellows) were much more likely to identify multiplanar fracture patterns with the aid of CT. Use of CT did not change attending surgeons’ recognition of these multiplanar fractures, suggesting that the faculty were more capable of appreciating these fracture patterns with radiographs only (Figure 3). We also observed that adding CT changed the predominant treatment plan for multiplanar fractures from a lateral approach to a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy. Failure to appreciate this component of the fracture before surgery could lead to an increased intraoperative difficulty level. Failure to appreciate it during surgery could lead to unexpected postoperative displacement and ultimately poorer outcome.

 

 

There are limitations to our study. There is no gold standard for assessing the accuracy of classification decisions. Intraoperative classification could have served as a gold standard, but the fractures were not routinely assigned a classification during surgery. Brouwer and colleagues13 evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CT (including 3-D CT) with intraoperative AO classification as a reference point and found improvement in intraobserver agreement but not interobserver agreement when describing fracture characteristics—and no significant effect on classification.

We used a single classification system, the one primarily used at our institution and by Dr. Itamura. There are many systems,7,12,14 all with their strengths and weaknesses, and no one system is used universally. Adding a system would have allowed us to compare results of more than one system. Our aim, however, was to keep our form simple for the sake of participation and completion of the viewings by each volunteer.

Only 2-D CT was used for this study, as 3-D images were not available for all patients. Although this is a potential weakness, it appears that, based on the study by Doornberg and colleagues,2 adding 3-D imaging resulted in only modest improvement in the reliability of classification and no significant improvement in agreement on treatment recommendation.

In addition, our results were likely biased by the fact that 8 of the 9 evaluators were trained by Dr. Itamura, who very often uses a posterior approach with an olecranon osteotomy for internal fixation of distal humerus intra-articular fractures, as previously described.8,10 Therefore, selection of this treatment option may have been overestimated in this study. Nevertheless, after reviewing the literature, Ljungquist and colleagues15 wrote, “There do not seem to be superior functional results associated with any one surgical approach to the distal humerus.”

We did not give the evaluators an indication of patients’ activity demands (only age and sex), which may have been relevant when considering total elbow arthroplasty.

Last, performing another round of evaluations with only plain radiographs, before introducing CT, would have provided intraobserver reliability results on plain radiograph evaluation, which could have been compared with intraobserver reliability when CT was added. Again, this was excluded to encourage participation and create the least cumbersome evaluation experience possible, which was thought appropriate, as this information is already in the literature.

Conclusion

Adding CT changed classifications and treatment plans. Raters were more likely to change their classifications than their treatment plans. The addition of CT did not increase agreement between observers. Despite the added radiation and cost, we recommend performing CT for all intra-articular distal humerus fractures because it improves understanding of the fracture pattern and affects treatment planning, especially for fractures with a coronal shear component, which is often not appreciated on plain radiographs.

References

1.    Anglen J. Distal humerus. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13(5):291-297.

2.    Doornberg J, Lindenhovius A, Kloen P, van Dijk CN, Zurakowski D, Ring D. Two and three-dimensional computed tomography for the classification and management of distal humerus fractures. Evaluation of reliability and diagnostic accuracy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(8):1795-1801.

3.    Pollock JW, Faber KJ, Athwal GS. Distal humerus fractures. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39(2):187-200.

4.    Castagno AA, Shuman WP, Kilcoyne RF, Haynor DR, Morris ME, Matsen FA. Complex fractures of the proximal humerus: role of CT in treatment. Radiology. 1987;165(3):759-762.

5.    Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, Parkkari J. Secular trends in the osteoporotic fractures of the distal humerus in elderly women. Eur J Epidemiol. 1998;14(2):159-164.

6.    Siebenrock KA, Gerber C. The reproducibility of classification of fractures of the proximal end of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(12):1751-1755.

7.    Jupiter JB, Mehne DK. Fractures of the distal humerus. Orthopedics. 1992;15(7):825-833.

8.    Zalavras CG, McAllister ET, Singh A, Itamura JM. Operative treatment of intra-articular distal humerus fractures. Am J Orthop. 2007;36(12 suppl):8-12.

9.    Cramer H. Mathematical Methods of Statistics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1946.

10.  Panossian V, Zalavras C, Mirzayan R, Itamura JM. Intra-articular distal humerus fractures. In: Mirzayan R, Itamura JM, eds. Shoulder and Elbow Trauma. New York, NY: Thieme; 2004:67-78.

11.  Wainwright AM, Williams JR, Carr AJ. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in classification systems for fractures of the distal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82(5):636-642.

12.  Müller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P, Schatzker J. The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures in Long Bones. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1990.

13.  Brouwer KM, Lindenhovius AL, Dyer GS, Zurakowski D, Mudgal C, Ring D. Diagnostic accuracy of 2- and 3-dimensional imaging and modeling of distal humerus fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(6):772-776.

14.  Riseborough EJ, Radin EL. Intercondylar T fractures of the humerus in the adult. A comparison of operative and non-operative treatment in 29 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(1):130-141.

15.  Ljungquist KL, Beran MC, Awan H. Effects of surgical approach on functional outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation of intra-articular distal humeral fractures: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(1):126-135.

References

1.    Anglen J. Distal humerus. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13(5):291-297.

2.    Doornberg J, Lindenhovius A, Kloen P, van Dijk CN, Zurakowski D, Ring D. Two and three-dimensional computed tomography for the classification and management of distal humerus fractures. Evaluation of reliability and diagnostic accuracy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(8):1795-1801.

3.    Pollock JW, Faber KJ, Athwal GS. Distal humerus fractures. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39(2):187-200.

4.    Castagno AA, Shuman WP, Kilcoyne RF, Haynor DR, Morris ME, Matsen FA. Complex fractures of the proximal humerus: role of CT in treatment. Radiology. 1987;165(3):759-762.

5.    Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, Parkkari J. Secular trends in the osteoporotic fractures of the distal humerus in elderly women. Eur J Epidemiol. 1998;14(2):159-164.

6.    Siebenrock KA, Gerber C. The reproducibility of classification of fractures of the proximal end of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(12):1751-1755.

7.    Jupiter JB, Mehne DK. Fractures of the distal humerus. Orthopedics. 1992;15(7):825-833.

8.    Zalavras CG, McAllister ET, Singh A, Itamura JM. Operative treatment of intra-articular distal humerus fractures. Am J Orthop. 2007;36(12 suppl):8-12.

9.    Cramer H. Mathematical Methods of Statistics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1946.

10.  Panossian V, Zalavras C, Mirzayan R, Itamura JM. Intra-articular distal humerus fractures. In: Mirzayan R, Itamura JM, eds. Shoulder and Elbow Trauma. New York, NY: Thieme; 2004:67-78.

11.  Wainwright AM, Williams JR, Carr AJ. Interobserver and intraobserver variation in classification systems for fractures of the distal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82(5):636-642.

12.  Müller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P, Schatzker J. The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures in Long Bones. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1990.

13.  Brouwer KM, Lindenhovius AL, Dyer GS, Zurakowski D, Mudgal C, Ring D. Diagnostic accuracy of 2- and 3-dimensional imaging and modeling of distal humerus fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(6):772-776.

14.  Riseborough EJ, Radin EL. Intercondylar T fractures of the humerus in the adult. A comparison of operative and non-operative treatment in 29 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(1):130-141.

15.  Ljungquist KL, Beran MC, Awan H. Effects of surgical approach on functional outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation of intra-articular distal humeral fractures: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(1):126-135.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 44(9)
Page Number
E326-E330
Page Number
E326-E330
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
The Role of Computed Tomography in Evaluating Intra-Articular Distal Humerus Fractures
Display Headline
The Role of Computed Tomography in Evaluating Intra-Articular Distal Humerus Fractures
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, computed tomography, CT, imaging, humerus fractures, fractures, fracture management, trauma, fracture, humerus, distal humerus, radiographic, arm, nolan, sweet, ferkel, udofia, itamura
Legacy Keywords
american journal of orthopedics, AJO, original study, study, online exclusive, computed tomography, CT, imaging, humerus fractures, fractures, fracture management, trauma, fracture, humerus, distal humerus, radiographic, arm, nolan, sweet, ferkel, udofia, itamura
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media