MR Imaging of Normal Epiphyseal Development and Common Epiphyseal Disorders

Jaimes, Camilo; Chauvin, Nancy A.; Delgado, Jorge; Jaramillo, Diego

doi:10.1148/rg.342135070

Cited by 73 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Possibly owing to their transient nature, these preossification centers of the medial humeral head and greater tuberosity may be noted at MR imaging in the first few months of life, appearing as tiny foci a few millimeters in size, with low signal intensity on T1-weighted images and high signal intensity on fluid-sensitive images ( Fig 12) (5). Preossification centers with identical histologic and imaging characteristics have also been described elsewhere in the body (10)(11)(12)(13)(14). The preossification centers, with their fluid-like signal intensity, should not be mistaken for an intraepiphyseal abscess (Fig 13).…”

Section: Humerus Ossification Centersmentioning

confidence: 80%

Normal Skeletal Maturation and Imaging Pitfalls in the Pediatric Shoulder

Zember¹,

Rosenberg²,

Kwong³

et al. 2015

RadioGraphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing number of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging studies of the shoulder are being performed as a result of greater and earlier participation of children and adolescents in competitive sports such as softball and baseball. However, scant information is available regarding the MR imaging features of the normal sequential development of the shoulder. The authors discuss the radiographic and MR imaging appearances of the normal musculoskeletal maturation patterns of the shoulder, with emphasis on (a) development of secondary ossification centers of the glenoid (including the subcoracoid and peripheral glenoid ossification centers); (b) development of preossification and secondary ossification centers of the humeral head and the variable appearance and number of the secondary ossification centers of the distal acromion, with emphasis on the formation of the os acromiale; (c) development of the growth plates, glenoid bone plates, glenoid bare area, and proximal humeral metaphyseal stripe; and (d) marrow signal alterations in the distal humerus, acromion, and clavicle. In addition, the authors discuss various imaging interpretation pitfalls inherent to the normal skeletal maturation of the shoulder, examining clues that may help distinguish normal development from true disease (eg, osteochondral lesions, labral tears, abscesses, fractures, infection, tendon disease, acromioclavicular widening, and os acromiale). Familiarity with the timing, location, and appearance of maturation patterns in the pediatric shoulder is crucial for correct image interpretation.

show abstract

Section: Humerus Ossification Centersmentioning

confidence: 80%

Normal Skeletal Maturation and Imaging Pitfalls in the Pediatric Shoulder

Zember¹,

Rosenberg²,

Kwong³

et al. 2015

RadioGraphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In cases of hip dysplasia, MR imaging demonstrates un-ossified structures and helps to guide treatment. In cases of trauma, the intra-cartilaginous pathway of fractures and the degree of epiphyseal involvement can be assessed with the use of intravenous gadoliniumbased contrast material, avascular necrosis and reperfusion can be characterized [8] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Neoplastic Femoral Head Lesions: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Value

Teima¹,

El-Gohary

2019

The Medical Journal of Cairo University

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hip pain is a common problem in patients of all ages, attributed to many causes. MRI combined with recent technologic developmentst plays a crucial role in assessment of epiphyseal disorders in great detail without ionizing radiation. Aim of Study:Was to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRI in assessment of non-neoplastic femoral head lesions. Patients and Methods:This study included 40 patients, 22 females (55%) and 18 males (45%), their ages ranged from 4 to 65 years with a mean age of 35 years complaining of hip pain. The most frequently involved age group was the group >30-40 years in both males and females.All patients were clinically evaluated, and then subjected for radiological examination and medical imaging (MRI) for all patients and ultrasonography for 6 patients (5 developmental dysplasia and 1 septic arthritis).Results: Out of forty patients who had performed MRI were classified to: Avascular necrosis; the commonest disease in our study; as it is seen in 12 (30%) patients, followed by; osteoarthritis in 6 (15%) patients, migratory osteoporosis in 4 (10%) patients, septic arthritis in 4 (10%) patients, developmental dysplasia in 5 (12.5%) patients, Perthe's disease in 4 (10%) patients, slipped capital femoral epiphysis in 3 (7.5%) patients and stress fractures in 2 (5%) patients.The final diagnosis achieved through the MRI findings were confirmed by surgical data in 6 patients with avascular necrosis, histopathology in 5 patients (3 septic arthritis and 2 osteoarthritis) and follow-up by clinical, laboratory and other imaging studies in 29 patients.Conclusion: MRI is highly sensitive imaging modality for diagnosis and characterizing of different non-neoplastic femoral head lesions and accurate for assessing the full extent of osseous, chondral and soft tissue abnormalities of the hip joint.

show abstract

“…[20][21][22][23] Longitudinal fractures (Salter-Harris types III and IV) are associated with a higher rate of physeal bar formation compared with horizontal fractures (Salter-Harris types I and II). 24 This disparity is secondary to involvement of the resting zone or the zone of proliferating cartilage in the case of longitudinal fractures. 19,21,22 Posttraumatic physeal bars typically affect the distal aspect of long bones, and it is the anatomical location of the physeal injury that correlates more with the risk of growth arrest than the Salter-Harris fracture type.…”

Section: Salter-harris Fracturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19,21,22 Posttraumatic physeal bars typically affect the distal aspect of long bones, and it is the anatomical location of the physeal injury that correlates more with the risk of growth arrest than the Salter-Harris fracture type. 24 As an example, physeal injuries of the distal femur, distal tibia, and distal ulna show the highest association with growth arrest 9,19,21,22,24 (►Fig. 9).…”

Section: Salter-harris Fracturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Primary Physis

Brian

Choi

Moore

2018

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary physis is responsible for long bone growth in children and adolescents. Injury and physiologic or metabolic stress to the primary physis present unique radiologic findings that are important for radiologists to recognize and diagnose. Appreciation of the anatomy and histology of the primary physis forms the basis for understanding the imaging findings associated with pathologic conditions affecting the primary physis. Salter-Harris injuries, physeal bars, growth arrest lines, rickets, and focal periphyseal edema zones are common conditions with recognizable radiologic presentations. Proper diagnosis of these primary physeal conditions will aid in the treatment of affected pediatric patients.

show abstract

MR Imaging of Normal Epiphyseal Development and Common Epiphyseal Disorders

Cited by 73 publications

References 78 publications

Normal Skeletal Maturation and Imaging Pitfalls in the Pediatric Shoulder

Normal Skeletal Maturation and Imaging Pitfalls in the Pediatric Shoulder

Non-Neoplastic Femoral Head Lesions: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Value

The Primary Physis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About