2011
DOI: 10.7863/jum.2011.30.12.1669
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Sonographically Guided Intra‐articular Injections at 3 Different Sites of the Knee

Abstract: Objectives Sonographically guided injections show more accuracy than blind injections, but there are no reports comparing sonographically guided intra‐articular injection approaches. This study examined the accuracy of sonographically guided intra‐articular injections at 3 different sites of the knee using medial, midlateral, and superolateral portals. Methods Sonographically guided intra‐articular injections and radiology evaluations were performed on 126 knees with osteoarthritis (Kellgren‐Lawrence grade 2 o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
20
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For studies that performed guided IAKIs, two medial sites, MMP [37,39] and SMP [38] and four lateral sites, ALJL [20,28], LMP [39], SLP [13,39], and LSB [2,19,34–36,40] were used. The lateral sites were more commonly used during guided IAKIs while blinded injections were more frequently delivered through medial sites.…”
Section: Knee Joint Injection Sites and Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For studies that performed guided IAKIs, two medial sites, MMP [37,39] and SMP [38] and four lateral sites, ALJL [20,28], LMP [39], SLP [13,39], and LSB [2,19,34–36,40] were used. The lateral sites were more commonly used during guided IAKIs while blinded injections were more frequently delivered through medial sites.…”
Section: Knee Joint Injection Sites and Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accuracy rates have ranged from 75% to 100% across all approaches (9,12,37,39,66). Accuracy rates have ranged from 75% to 100% across all approaches (9,12,37,39,66).…”
Section: Knee Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A majority of the studies (49/57 (86%))6 7 9 11–13 15 17–25 27–30 32–51 53–61 evaluated injections in a single joint, whereas 14% (8/57)5 8 10 16 26 31 52 55 assessed injections in more than one joint. Thirty-five per cent (20/57) of the studies evaluated knee injections,8–10 13 15 16 19–23 26 31 32 36 37 48 52 56 57 46% (26/57) evaluated glenohumeral (GH) joint injections,5 7 8 10 11 15–17 24–26 28 29 31 38–40 42 43 46 47 49 52 54 60 61 21% (12/57) evaluated hip injections8 12 27 30 33 35 41 44 45 50 52 59 62 and 4% (2/57) evaluated sacroiliac (SI) joint injections 18 34. Four studies (7%) assessed injections in the ‘shoulder’, but did not specify which shoulder structure or joint they were injecting 6 53 55 58…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%