Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Arthrography of the glenohumeral joint: experience with a non-ionic dimeric contrast agent and future perspectives

  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The role of conventional arthrography versus computed tomography (CT) arthrography of the glenohumeral joint using iotrolan was evaluated in patients with different shoulder problems. In addition, a diagnostic combination of conventional and CT arthrography was compared with magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography of the glenohumeral joint. Two diagnostic protocols were used. Protocol 1: conventional followed after 30 min by CT arthrography of 37 joints using a double contrast technique with iotrolan 300. Protocol 2: conventional followed after 90–180 min by MR arthrography in 20 patients using a single-contrast technique with 10 ml iotrolan 300 and 1 ml gedopentetate dimeglumine 500 mM. Ten patients also underwent CT arthrography. Neither patient group experienced contrast-related complications. Image quality was good for all conventional arthrograms, excellent in 45/47 CT arthrograms and good in 20 MR arthrograms. CT and MR arthrography were diagnostically valuable in many patients. We conclude that glenohumeral joint evaluation should be perfomed first using conventional or CT arthrography. Iotrolan has proven to be highly reliable and safe in these applications. Iotrolan in combination with gadopentetate dimeglumine, permits MR arthrography following completion of the standard examinations if necessary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moseley HF, Oevergaard B (1962) The anterior capsular mechanism in recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 44B:913–927

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mink JH, Harris E, Rappaport M (1985) Rotator cuff tears: evaluation using double contrast shoulder arthrography. Radiology 157:621–623

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Goldman AB, Ghelman B (1978) The double-contrast shoulder arthrogram. Radiology 127: 655–663

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Stiles RG, Otte MT (1993) Imaging of the shoulder. Radiology 188: 603–613

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mack LA, Matsen FA, Kilcoyne RF, Davies PK, Sickler ME (1985) US evaluation of the rotator cuff. Radiology 157: 205–209

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Middleton WD (1989) Status of rotator cuff sonography. Radiology 173: 307–309

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Middleton WD (1993) Sonographic detection and quantification of rotator cuff tears. AJR 160: 109–110

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wiener SN, Seitz WH (1993) Sonography of the shoulder in patients with tears of the rotator cuff: Accuracy and value for selecting surgical options. AJR 160: 103–107

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schmidt M, Taenzer V, Wenzel-Hora BI (1987) Methodology and imaging contrast in arthrography of the shoulder. Roentgenpraxis 40: 413–421

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pennes DR (1990) Shoulder joint: Arthrographic CT appearance. Radiology 175: 878–879

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rafii M, Firooznia H, Golimbu C, Minkoff J, Bonamo J (1986) CT arthrography of capsular structures of the shoulder. AJR 146: 361–367

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter JC, Blatz DJ, Escobedo EM (1992) SLAP lesions of the glenoid labrum: CT arthrographic and arthroscopic correlation. Radiology 184: 513–518

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Singson RD, Feldman F, Bigliani LU (1987) Recurrent shoulder dislocation after surgical repair: Double-contrast CT arthrography. Radiology 164: 425–428

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Singson RD, Feldman F, Bigliani LU (1987) CT arthrographic patterns in recurrent glenohumeral instability. AJR 149: 749–753

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wilson AJ, Totty WG, Murphy WA, Hardy DC (1989) Shoulder joint: arthrographic CT and long term follow up, with surgical correlation. Radiology 173: 329–333

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Garneau RA, Renfrew DL, Moore TE, El-Khoury GY, Nepola JV, Lemke JH (1991) Glenoid labrum: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology 179: 519–522

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Huber DJ, Sauter R, Mueller E (1986) MR imaging of the normal shoulder. Radiology 158: 405–408

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zlatkin MB (1991) MRI of the shoulder. Raven, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Palmer WE, Brown JH, Rosenthal DI (1993) Rotator cuff: evaluation with fat-suppressed MR arthrography. Radiology 188: 683–687

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hajek PC, Sartoris DJ, Neumann CH, Resnick D (1987) Potential contrast agents for MR arthrography: in-vitro evaluation and practical observations. AJR 149: 97–104

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hajek PC, Sartoris DJ, Gylys-Morin V, Haghighi P, Engel A, Kramer F, et al. (1990) The effect of intra-articular gadolinium-DTPA on synovial membrane and cartilage. Invest Radiol 25: 179–183

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Flannigan B, Kursunoglu-Brahme S, Snyder SJ, Karzel R, Del Pizzo W, Resnick D (1990) MR arthrography of the shoulder: comparison with conventional MR imaging. AJR 155: 829–832

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kopka L, Funke M, Fischer U, Keating D, Oestmann J, Grabbe E (1994) MR arthrography of the shoulder with gadopentetate dimeglumine: Influence of concentration, iodinated contrast material, and time on signal intensity. AJR 163: 621–623

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gachter A, Seelig W (1992) Arthroscopy of the shoulder. Arthroscopy 8: 89–97

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Buss DD, Warren RF, Galinat BJ (1991) Indications for shoulder arthroscopy. In: McGinty JB (ed) Operative arthroscopy. Raven, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schmidt M, Papassotiriou (1989) Arthrography with Iotrolan: double-blind comparison between nonoinic, monomeric (Iohexol 300) and nonionic, dimeric (Iotrolan 300) contrast media. In: Taenzer V, Wende S (eds) Recent developments in nonionic contrast media. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 182–189

    Google Scholar 

  27. Corbetti F, Malatesta V, Camposampiero A, Mazzi A, Punzi L, Angelini F, et al. (1986) Knee arthrography: effect of various contrast media and epinephrine on synovial fluid. Radiology 161: 195–198

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hall FM, Goldberg RP, Wishak G, Kilcoyne RF (1985) Arthrography-comparison of morbidity after use of various contrast media. Radiology 154: 339–341

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Obermann WR, Bloem JL, Hermans J (1989) Knee arthrography: comparison of iotrolan and ioxaglate sodium meglumine. Radiology 173: 197–201

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. van Bree H, van Rijssen B, Tshamala M, Maenhout T (1992) Comparison of the non ionic contrast agents, iopromide and iotrolan, for positive-contrast arthrography of the scapulohumeral joints in dogs. Am J Vet Res 52: 1622–1626

    Google Scholar 

  31. Jinkins JR, Robinson JW, Sisk L, Fullerton GD, Williams RF (1992) Proton relaxation enhancement associated with iodinated contrast agents in MR imaging of the CNS. AJNR 13: 19–27

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kopka L, Funke M, Fischer U, Grabbe E (1993) Signal intensity of various iodinated contrast agents and their effects on the gadopentetate dimeglumine-dependent relaxation times in MR imaging (abstract). Radiology 189(P):246

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology I, University Hospital Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, D-37075, Göttingen, Germany

    L. Kopka, M. Funke, R. Vosshenrich, M. Schroeder, J. Oestmann & E. Grabbe

Authors
  1. L. Kopka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Funke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Vosshenrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Schroeder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Oestmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. E. Grabbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kopka, L., Funke, M., Vosshenrich, R. et al. Arthrography of the glenohumeral joint: experience with a non-ionic dimeric contrast agent and future perspectives. Eur. Radiol. 5 (Suppl 2), S18–S23 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02343256

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02343256

Key words

Search

Navigation