The arcTOA Technique for Out-of-Plane Ultrasound-Guided Injections

Impact of Predefined Angles and a Revised APPLES Mnemonic on Accuracy and Performance Time for Simulated Ultrasound-Guided Injections

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to determine whether predefined angles would improve performance time and accuracy of ultrasound-guided procedures by novice operators and whether a revised APPLES (approach, position, perpendicular, lift, entry, sweep) mnemonic was a helpful guide for performing the procedure.

METHODS

Participants attempted to hit targets in-plane and out-of-plane at different depths with a needle under ultrasound guidance with and without predefined angles. Participants were then asked if they thought that the mnemonic would be helpful when learning both methods for ultrasound-guided procedures.

RESULTS

There were 120 participants all of whom had performed fewer than six ultrasound guided procedures. Accuracy increased in all groups when angles were provided; however, only the 3-cm in-plane approach achieved statistical significance. Performance time also achieved statistical significance in two of the four groups. Ninety-five percent of participants thought that the revised APPLES mnemonic would be helpful for learning and performing ultrasound-guided procedures in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Predefined angles seem to positively impact procedure time and accuracy for some target depths, and the APPLES mnemonic could be a helpful mental checklist for many novice operators. These may be useful tools to facilitate safe and efficient ultrasound-guided procedures in the clinical space.

A comparison of ultrasound-guided rotator interval and posterior glenohumeral injection techniques for MR shoulder arthrography

PURPOSE

The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the performance of a rotator interval approach with the posterior glenohumeral approach for ultrasound-guided contrast injection prior to MR shoulder arthrography.

METHOD

This study was approved by the institutional review board. One hundred and twenty consecutive patients referred for MR shoulder arthrography were randomized into four groups: rotator interval approach in-plane (n = 30); rotator interval approach out-of-plane (n = 30); posterior approach in-plane (n = 30); and posterior approach out-of plane (n = 30). Outcome measures included procedure time, number of injection attempts, patient-reported pain score (0-10), and radiologist-reported technical difficulty (0-10). MR arthrograms were assessed for adequacy of joint distension, diagnostic utility, and extra-capsular contrast leakage.

RESULTS

All 120 patients had a successful ultrasound-guided injection with adequate joint distension and diagnostic utility for MR arthrography. In-plane needle guidance was less technically demanding, quicker, required fewer injection attempts, and had a lower frequency of contrast leakage than out-of-plane needle guidance. The posterior glenohumeral approach was less technically demanding though had a higher frequency of contrast leakage and caused more patient discomfort than the rotator interval approach.

CONCLUSION

For ultrasound-guided shoulder joint injection, an in-plane approach is preferable. The posterior glenohumeral approach is less technically demanding though causes more patients discomfort than the rotator interval approach possibly due to the longer needle path.