Ultrasound guidance for intra-articular injections of the foot and ankle

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in Chronic Lateral Ankle Instability: A Case Series

The platelet-rich plasma (PRP) approach may be an effective treatment for joint and cartilage pathologies. However, the rationale for its effectiveness on joint instability is limited. This study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of PRP injections in patients with chronic lateral ankle instability (CLAI). This retrospective study was performed at a single-center outpatient clinic between January 2015 and February 2023 and included pre-intervention assessment and short-term follow-up. Patients were excluded if they had received previous surgical treatment or had constitutional hyperlaxity, systemic diseases, or grade II or III osteoarthritis. The clinical and functional evaluation consisted of the Karlsson score, the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT), Good's grading system, the patient's subjective satisfaction level, and the time required to return to exercise. The entire PRP therapy regime consisted of three PRP administrations at 7-day intervals and follow-up appointments. PRP was administered both intraarticularly and into talofibular ligaments. A total of 47 consecutive patients with CLAI were included, 11 were female (23.4%), with a mean age at intervention of 31.19 ± 9.74 years. A statistically significant improvement was found in the CAIT and Karlsson scores at 3 months (27.74 ± 1.68 and 96.45 ± 4.28, respectively) relative to the pre-intervention status (10.26 ± 4.33 and 42.26 ± 14.9, respectively, p < 0.000). The mean follow-up of patients with CLAI was 17.94 ± 3.25 weeks. This study represents successful short-term functional and clinical outcomes in patients with CLAI after PRP treatment, with no adverse effects. It demonstrates the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to further assess this therapy.

Case Report: Portable handheld ultrasound facilitates intra-articular injections in articular foot pathologies

Background

Intra-articular injections are commonly used to manage joint pathologies, including osteoarthritis. While conventional ultrasound (US) guidance has generally improved intra-articular injection accuracy, forefoot and midfoot joint interventions are still often performed without imaging guidance. This pilot study aims to evaluate the efficacy of office-based, portable ultrasound (P-US) guided intra-articular injections for forefoot and midfoot joint pain caused by various degenerative pathologies.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on a series of consecutive patients who underwent P-US guided intra-articular injections following a chief complaint of forefoot or midfoot joint pain. Patients reported their pain levels using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pre-injection and at 3 months follow-up. The procedure was performed by an experienced foot and ankle surgeon using a linear array transducer for guidance, and a 25-gauge needle was used to inject a combination of 2 cc 1% lidocaine and 12 cc of Kenalog (40 mg/ml). Complications and pain scores were analyzed using a paired t-test and p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

We included 16 patients, 31% male and 69% female with a mean age (±SD) of 61.31 (±12.04) years. None of the patients experienced immediate complications following the intervention. The mean pre-injection VAS score was significantly reduced from 5.21 (±2.04) to a mean of 0.50 (±1.32) at 3 months follow-up (P < 0.001). Thirteen patients reported complete resolution of pain at the 3-month follow-up. No adverse events were reported throughout the duration of the study.

Conclusion

This pilot study suggests P-US-guided intra-articular injections offer a safe and effective method for managing forefoot and midfoot joint pain caused by various arthritic pathologies. Further research is warranted to establish the long-term efficacy and comparative effectiveness of P-US-guided injections in larger patient cohorts as compared to non-image guided injections.

The Posttraumatic Tarsometatarsal Joints

Tarsometatarsal joint injuries can be painful and debilitating and are most commonly due to direct or indirect trauma. Posttraumatic arthritis is a well-known long-term complication, with incidence as high as 58%. Conservative treatment options include shoe modifications, orthotic inserts, topical or oral anti-inflammatories, and intra-articular corticosteroid injections. There are various joint prep and fixation techniques reported in the literature, many with positive clinical and radiographic outcomes. This article discusses nonoperative and operative management of posttraumatic tarsometatarsal joint arthritis, reviews available literature, and includes the authors' tips and techniques.

Accuracy of Intraarticular Injections: Blind vs. Image Guided Techniques-A Review of Literature

Intra-articular injections are widely used for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes of joint pathologies throughout the body. These injections can be performed blind by utilizing anatomical landmarks or with the use of imaging modalities to directly visualize the joint space during injections. This review of the literature aims to comprehensively identify differences in the accuracy of intra-articular injections via palpation vs. image guidance in the most commonly injected joints in the upper and lower extremities. To our knowledge, there are no such comprehensive reviews available. A narrative literature review was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar databases to identify studies focusing on the accuracy of blind or image-guided intra-articular injections for each joint. A total of 75 articles was included in this review, with blind and image-guided strategies being discussed for the most commonly injected joints of the upper and lower extremities. Varying ranges of accuracy with blind and image-guided modalities were found throughout the literature, though an improvement in accuracy was seen in nearly all joints when using image guidance. Differences are pronounced, particularly in deep joints such as the hip or in the small joints such as those in the hand or foot. Image guidance is a useful adjunct for most intra-articular injections, if available. Though there is an increase in accuracy in nearly all joints, minor differences in accuracy seen in large, easily accessed joints, such as the knee, may not warrant image guidance.

Ultrasound-guided joint interventions of the lower extremity

The purpose of this article is to better understand the role ultrasound plays in lower extremity joint interventions. Ultrasound is an important and reliable tool diagnostically and therapeutically. Real-time feedback, lack of ionizing radiation, and dynamic maneuverability make ultrasound an important tool in the proceduralist's armament. This article will touch upon the important anatomic considerations, clinical indications, and technical step-by-step details for lower extremity ultrasound interventions. Specifically, we will look at interventions involving the hip, knee, ankle, and foot. In addition, this article will discuss the roles corticosteroid and platelet-rich plasma may play in certain interventions.

Learning Effect for Large Joint Diagnostic Aspirations With Fluoroscopy and Ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

The first objective was to identify whether increased experience, gauged by number of procedures performed posttraining, is correlated with greater likelihood of obtaining joint fluid in diagnostic aspirations. The second objective was to identify whether trainee involvement at the time of procedure affected the success rate of the procedure (which in this case was obtaining fluid on aspiration).

DESIGN

This was a retrospective analysis of fluoroscopic- and ultrasound-guided large joint aspirations. Logarithmic fit was performed to identify the presence of a learning curve to the successful attainment of fluid with experience. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify whether trainee presence for a procedure affected fluid attainment.

RESULTS

Ultrasound did not demonstrate a significant fit to the logarithmic curve ( P = 0.447), whereas fluoroscopy did ( P < 0.001), indicative of a learning curve for fluoroscopy. After adjusting for covariates, joint fluid was successfully attained at a similar rate whether trainees were present or not. Significant independent factors related to successful joint fluid attainment were image guidance technique ( P = 0.001), body mass index ( P = 0.032), and joint aspirated (overall P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There was a statistically significant learning curve for fluoroscopic-guided joint aspirations, but not with ultrasound guidance. Trainee involvement did not affect the success rate of joint aspirations.

Summary Report of the Arthritis Foundation and the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society's Symposium on Targets for Osteoarthritis Research: Part 1: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Current Imaging Approaches

This first of a 2-part series of articles recounts the key points presented in a collaborative symposium sponsored jointly by the Arthritis Foundation and the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society with the intent to survey the state of scientific knowledge related to incidence, diagnosis, pathologic mechanisms, and injection treatment options for osteoarthritis (OA) of the foot and ankle. A meeting was held virtually on December 3, 2021. A group of experts were invited to present brief synopses of the current state of knowledge and research in this area. Part 1 overviews areas of epidemiology and pathophysiology, current approaches in imaging, diagnostic and therapeutic injections, and genetics. Opportunities for future research are discussed. The OA scientific community, including funding agencies, academia, industry, and regulatory agencies, must recognize the needs of patients that suffer from arthritis of foot and ankle. The foot and ankle contain a myriad of interrelated joints and tissues that together provide a critical functionality. When this functionality is compromised by OA, significant disability results, yet the foot and ankle are generally understudied by the research community. Level of Evidence: Level V - Review Article/Expert Opinion.

Ultrasound-versus landmark-guided medium-sized joint arthrocentesis: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

Arthrocentesis is commonly performed in the emergency department, but success rates vary based on location. Presently, there is a paucity of data assessing the utility of ultrasound-guided (USG) medium-sized joint arthrocentesis. The objective of this study was to compare the success of USG and landmark-guided (LMG) medium-sized joint arthrocentesis.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, randomized clinical trial (NCT03327584) of a convenience sample of adult patients who presented to an urban, university hospital with > 105,000 visits annually. Patients with a suspected medium-sized joint effusion (defined as elbow, wrist, or ankle) undergoing arthrocentesis were randomized into LMG or USG using the GE Logiq e linear transducer (4-10 MHz). The following patients were excluded: on anticoagulation, with soft tissue infection overlying the joint, or involving an artificial joint. Statistical analysis included the Fisher exact, Mann-Whitney U-test, and t-test.

RESULTS

Overall, 44 patients were enrolled with 23 patients randomized into the LMG group and 21 patients into the USG arm. USG was significantly better than LMG with an overall success of 94.1% versus 60% for LMG (difference = 34.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.90 to 58.83). USG first-pass success was 82.4% versus 46.7% for LMG (difference = 35.7%, 95% CI = 2.76 to 60.37) and a mean of 1.35 attempts versus 2.00 for LMG (difference = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.005 to 1.296). Of the 14 LMG failures, eight had no effusion present on USG crossover. Four patients in the USG group had no effusion present.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound guidance improved first-pass and overall successful arthrocentesis of medium-sized joint effusions.

Clinical indications for image-guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)-part VI, foot and ankle

Objectives

Clarity regarding accuracy and effectiveness for interventional procedures around the foot and ankle is lacking. Consequently, a board of 53 members of the Ultrasound and Interventional Subcommittees of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) reviewed the published literature to evaluate the evidence on image-guided musculoskeletal interventional procedures around this anatomical region.

Methods

We report the results of a Delphi-based consensus of 53 experts from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology who reviewed the published literature for evidence on image-guided interventional procedures offered around foot and ankle in order to derive their clinical indications. Experts drafted a list of statements and graded them according to the Oxford Centre for evidence-based medicine levels of evidence. Consensus was considered strong when > 95% of experts agreed with the statement or broad when > 80% but < 95% agreed. The results of the Delphi-based consensus were used to write the paper that was shared with all panel members for final approval.

Results

A list of 16 evidence-based statements on clinical indications for image-guided musculoskeletal interventional procedures in the foot and ankle were drafted after a literature review. The highest level of evidence was reported for four statements, all receiving 100% agreement.

Conclusion

According to this consensus, image-guided interventions should not be considered a first-level approach for treating Achilles tendinopathy, while ultrasonography guidance is strongly recommended to improve the efficacy of interventional procedures for plantar fasciitis and Morton’s neuroma, particularly using platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroids, respectively.

Key Points

• The expert panel of the ESSR listed 16 evidence-based statements on clinical indications of image-guided musculoskeletal interventional procedures in the foot and ankle.

• Strong consensus was obtained for all statements.

• The highest level of evidence was reached by four statements concerning the effectiveness of US-guided injections of corticosteroid for Morton’s neuroma and PRP for plantar fasciitis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-021-08125-z.

Accuracy of talonavicular injection using ultrasound versus anatomical landmark: a cadaver study

BACKGROUND

Intra-articular injections have diagnostic and therapeutic roles in foot and ankle pathologies due to complex anatomy, small size, diverse bones, and joints with proximity in this region. Conventionally, these injections are carried out using anatomical landmark technique and/or fluoroscopic guidance. The small joint space and needle size make the injection challenging. Fluoroscopy is not readily available in the clinical setting; ultrasound-guidance for injections is therefore increasingly being used. We compared the accuracy of intra-articular talonavicular injections using the anatomical landmark technique versus the ultrasound-guided method.

PURPOSE

To determine whether ultrasound guidance yields superior results in intra-articular injections of the talonavicular joint compared to injections using palpatory method guided by anatomical landmarks.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The feet of 10 cadaveric specimens were held in neutral position by an assistant while a fellowship-trained foot-ankle orthopedic surgeon injected 2 cc of radiopaque dye using anatomical landmarks and palpation method in five specimens and under ultrasound guidance in the remaining five. The needles were left in situ in all specimens and their placement was confirmed fluoroscopically.

RESULTS

In all five specimens injected under ultrasound guidance, the needle was found to be in the joint, whereas all five injected by palpation only were out of the joint, with one in the naviculo-cuneiform joint, showing ultrasound guidance to significantly increase the accuracy of intra-articular injections in the talonavicular joint than palpatory method alone.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided injections not only confirm correct needle placement, but also delineate any tendon and/or joint pathology simultaneously.

Injection Techniques for Common Chronic Pain Conditions of the Foot: A Comprehensive Review

Purpose of Review

This is a comprehensive literature review of the available evidence and techniques of foot injections for chronic pain conditions. It briefly describes common foot chronic pain syndromes and then reviews available injection techniques for each of these syndromes, weighing the available evidence and comparing the available approaches.

Recent Findings

Foot and ankle pain affects 20% of the population over 50 and significantly impairs mobility and ability to participate in activities of daily living (ADLs), as well as increases fall risk. It is commonly treated with costly surgery, at times with questionable efficacy. Injection therapy is challenging when the etiology is anatomical or compressive. Morton’s neuroma is a budging of the interdigital nerve. Steroid, alcohol, and capsaicin injections provide some benefit, but it is short lived. Hyaluronic acid (HA) injection provided long-term relief and could prove to be a viable treatment option. Achilles tendinopathy (AT) is most likely secondary to repeat tendon stress—platelet-rich-plasma (PRP) and prolotherapy have been trialed for this condition, but more evidence is required to show efficacy. Similar injections were trials for plantar fasciitis and achieved only short-term relief; however, some evidence suggests that PRP injections reduce the frequency of required therapy. Tarsal tunnel syndrome, a compressive neuropathy carries a risk of permanent neural injury if left untreated. Injection therapy can provide a bridge to surgery; however, surgical decompression remains the definitive therapy. When the etiology is inflammatory, steroid injection is more likely to provide benefit. This has been shown in several studies for gout, as well as osteoarthritis of the foot and ankle and treatment-refractory rheumatoid arthritis. HA showed similar benefit, possibly due to anti-inflammatory effects. Stem cell injections may provide the additional benefit of structure restoration.

Summary

Chronic foot pain is common in the general population and has significant associated morbidity and disability. Traditionally treated with surgery, these are costly and only somewhat effective. Injections provide an effective alternative financially and some evidence exists that they are effective in pain alleviation. However, current evidence is limited and the benefit described from injection therapy has been short-lived in most cases. Further studies in larger populations are required to evaluate the long-term effects of these treatments.

Midfoot arthritis- current concepts review

Midfoot arthritis causes chronic foot pain and significant impairment of daily activities. Although post traumatic arthritis and primary osteoarthritis are the most common pathologies encountered, surgeons need to rule out inflammatory causes and neuropathic aetiology before starting treatment. Steroid Injections are invaluable in conservative management and have diagnostic value in guiding surgical treatment. For the definitive surgical option of fusion there are a variety of fixation devices available. A successful union is linked to a satisfactory outcome which most authors report to be in the range of 90% following the key principles of careful patient selection, pre-operative planning, adequate joint preparation and a stable fixation.

What Is the Best Technique for Performing Aspiration of Patients With Total Ankle Arthroplasty (TAA)?

RECOMMENDATION

In the absence of evidence, we recommend that ankle joint aspiration to evaluate for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) be performed under sterile conditions via the anteromedial approach. Ultrasound guidance may be used if available but is not necessary to obtain an acceptable synovial fluid sample.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Consensus.

DELEGATE VOTE

Agree: 100%, Disagree: 0%, Abstain: 0% (Unanimous, Strongest Consensus).

Adverse Events and Their Risk Factors Following Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injections of the Ankle or Subtalar Joint

BACKGROUND

Little data exists regarding the incidence of adverse events and their associated risk factors following intra-articular corticosteroid injection of the ankle and subtalar joint. The aim of this study was to determine the complication rate associated with such injections and to identify any predictive risk factors.

METHODS

Adult patients who had received an intra-articular ankle or subtalar joint injection between January 2000 and April 2016 at one of 3 regional hospitals (2 level 1 trauma centers and 1 community hospital) were included. Patients with prior intra-articular injection of corticosteroid into the ankle or subtalar joint were excluded. Explanatory variables were sex, age, race, body mass index, diabetes status, tobacco use, presence of fluoroscopic guidance, location of intra-articular injection, and administering physician's years of experience.

RESULTS

Of the 1708 patients included in the final cohort, 99 patients (5.8%) had a total of 104 adverse events within 90 days postinjection. The most prevalent types of adverse events were postinjection flare in 78 patients (4.6% of total cohort, 75% of adverse events) followed by skin reaction in 10 patients (0.6% of total cohort, 9% of adverse events). No infections were noted. Multivariable logistic regression analysis found that intra-articular injection in the subtalar ( P = .004) was independently associated with development of an adverse event. Fluoroscopic guidance was not found to be protective of an adverse event compared to nonguided injections ( P = .476).

CONCLUSION

The adverse event rate following intra-articular ankle or subtalar joint corticosteroid injection was 5.8%, with postinjection flare being the most common complication. Infections following injection were not reported. Injection into the subtalar joint was independently associated with the development of an adverse event after intra-articular corticosteroid injection, and this was not mitigated by the use of fluoroscopic guidance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Aspiration and Injection Techniques of the Lower Extremity

Orthopaedic surgeons frequently use aspirations and injections to both diagnose and treat disorders of the lower extremity. Comprehensive knowledge of regional anatomy, procedural indications, and appropriate techniques are essential. Clinicians must be well versed in a range of musculoskeletal aspiration and injection techniques, including patient positioning, equipment needs, injectable solutions, aspirate analysis, and potential complications. Safe and effective aspiration and injection techniques for the lower extremity, including the hip, knee, foot, and ankle, are reviewed. Image guidance modalities include fluoroscopy, ultrasonography, CT, and MRI.

Existing Evidence on Ultrasound-Guided Injections in Sports Medicine

Office-based ultrasonography has become increasingly available in many settings, and its use to guide joint and soft tissue injections has increased. Numerous studies have been conducted to evaluate the use of ultrasound-guided injections over traditional landmark-guided injections, with a rapid growth in the literature over the past few years. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted to demonstrate increased accuracy of ultrasound-guided injections regardless of anatomic location. In the upper extremity, ultrasound-guided injections have been shown to provide superior benefit to landmark-guided injections at the glenohumeral joint, the subacromial space, the biceps tendon sheath, and the joints of the hand and wrist. Ultrasound-guided injections of the acromioclavicular and the elbow joints have not been shown to be more efficacious. In the lower extremity, ultrasound-guided injections at the knee, ankle, and foot have superior efficacy to landmark-guided injections. Conclusive evidence is not available regarding improved efficacy of ultrasound-guided injections of the hip, although landmark-guided injection is performed less commonly at the hip joint. Ultrasound-guided injections are overall more accurate than landmark-guided injections. While current studies indicate that ultrasound guidance improves efficacy and cost-effectiveness of many injections, these studies are limited and more research is needed.

Tarsometatarsal joint communication during fluoroscopy-guided therapeutic joint injections and relationship with patient age and degree of osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

Although the tarsometatarsal joints are separated into three distinct synovial compartments, communications between adjacent compartments are often noted during image-guided injections. This study aims to determine whether abnormal inter-compartment tarsometatarsal joint communication is associated with patient age or degree of tarsometatarsal osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred forty tarsometatarsal injections were retrospectively reviewed by two radiologists. Extent of inter-compartment communication and degree of osteoarthritis were independently scored. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to assess whether the presence of and number of abnormal joint communications were related to age and degree of osteoarthritis.

RESULTS

Forty out of 140 tarsometatarsal joints showed abnormal communication with a separate synovial compartment, and 3 of the 40 showed abnormal communication with two separate compartments. On univariate analysis, higher grade osteoarthritis (p < 0.001) and older age (p = 0.014) were associated with an increased likelihood of abnormal inter-compartment tarsometatarsal communication and a greater number of these abnormal communications. On multivariate analysis, the degree of osteoarthritis remained a significant predictor of the presence of (p < 0.001) and number of (p < 0.001) abnormal communications, while the association of age was not statistically significant. There was significant correlation between age and degree of osteoarthritis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Higher grade osteoarthritis increases the likelihood of abnormal inter-compartment tarsometatarsal joint communication and is associated with a greater number of abnormal communications. Diagnostic injection to localize a symptomatic tarsometatarsal joint may be less reliable in the setting of advanced osteoarthritis.

Current Ultrasound Application in the Foot and Ankle

This article is a comprehensive review of the current utilizations of ultrasound in the treatment of orthopedic conditions of the foot and ankle. It reviews the diagnostic and interventional applications to commonly encountered lower-extremity ailments, including plantar fasciosis, tendinosis, and peripheral nerve disorders. It also outlines minimally invasive ultrasound-guided procedures and emerging therapies as alternatives to current treatments. These emerging therapies can be used to assist surgeons and provide options for patients needing intervention. Techniques such as hydrodissection, injection, aspiration, tenotomy, and fasciotomy are discussed, giving readers insight into different treatment modalities and options to help manage their patients.

Musculoskeletal interventional procedures: With or without imaging guidance?

Aspiration and injection of joints and soft tissues is an indispensable skill used in everyday practice by the clinical rheumatologist. Most rheumatologists recognise that performing these procedures using anatomical landmarks is not always successful, particularly in the case of small or infrequently injected joints, bursae or tendon sheaths. Musculoskeletal ultrasound confirms the local pathological-anatomical diagnosis and is the most applicable and feasible imaging method that can be applied in clinical practice in guiding musculoskeletal interventional procedures. From 1993, there has been substantial examination of the accuracy of landmark- and imaging-guided procedures. We have searched the literature and ascertained whether imaging techniques improve the accuracy of musculoskeletal procedures and whether the accuracy of needle placement can be translated into improved clinical outcome (efficacy).

Ultrasound-guided procedures in rheumatology. What is the evidence?

Ultrasound (US) is a cost-effective, noninvasive, and accessible imaging modality that clinicians use at the point of care to assess disease activity and therapeutic efficacy in different rheumatic conditions. It can play a relevant role in invasive procedures performed by the rheumatologist, potentially ensuring a higher degree of accuracy. However, US-guided injections are still underused, and the conventional blind injection the most commonly adopted approach. In this article, we analyze the current evidence supporting the use of US-guided procedures, emphasizing comparative studies between conventional and US-guided procedures and their benefits in the daily rheumatological practice.

Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures in Pain Medicine: A Review of Anatomy, Sonoanatomy, and Procedures: Part VI: Ankle Joint

Ultrasound-guided injections in pain medicine are emerging as a popular technique for pain interventions. Ultrasound can be applied for procedures of the ankle joint and surrounding structures. This review describes the anatomy and sonoanatomy of the ankle joint, subtalar joint, and surrounding extra-articular structures relevant for intra-articular injection. Second, it reviews injection techniques and the accuracy and efficacy of these intra-articular ankle injections.

American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) position statement: interventional musculoskeletal ultrasound in sports medicine

The use of diagnostic and interventional ultrasound has significantly increased over the past decade. A majority of the increased utilization is by nonradiologists. In sports medicine, ultrasound is often used to guide interventions such as aspirations, diagnostic or therapeutic injections, tenotomies, releases, and hydrodissections. This American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) position statement critically reviews the literature and evaluates the accuracy, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided injections in major, intermediate, and small joints, and soft tissues, all of which are commonly performed in sports medicine. New ultrasound-guided procedures and future trends are also briefly discussed. Based upon the evidence, the official AMSSM position relevant to each subject is made.

99mTc-HDP SPECT-CT Aids Localization of Joint Injections in Degenerative Joint Disease of the Foot and Ankle

BACKGROUND

Pain relating to degenerative joint disease within the foot and ankle can be difficult to localize with clinical examination alone due to the complex anatomy of the joints. The aim of this study was to determine whether single-photon emission computed tomography combined with conventional computed tomography (SPECT-CT) could be used to localize the site of degenerative joint disease for intra-articular injection and thereby improve the clinical success of the procedure.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed involving 203 patients who had undergone triple-phase (99m)Tc-hydroxymethylene diphosphonate bone scans with SPECT-CT of the foot and ankle for degenerative joint disease. Fifty-two patients went on to have joint injections for degenerative joint disease, with clinical follow-up. Correlation with the clinical diagnosis and the outcome of intra-articular injections with 0.5% bupivacaine and 80 mg of Depo-Medrone was performed. A successful outcome was determined by an improvement in the visual analog pain score of at least 50%.

RESULTS

In 19 (37%) patients, the site of degenerative joint disease determined by SPECT-CT differed from the initial clinical assessment and resulted in a change in management. Overall, 46 (88%) patients showed an improvement in symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated a high clinical success rate for SPECT-CT-guided joint injections. The technique was useful in localizing degenerative joint disease of the ankle, hindfoot, and midfoot as an adjunct to clinical examination.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection of the subtalar joint for treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

The subtalar joint is commonly affected in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and is challenging to treat percutaneously.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the technique for treating the subtalar joint with US-guided corticosteroid injections in children and young adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and to evaluate the safety of the treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 122 patients (age 15 months-29 years) with juvenile idiopathic arthritis who were referred by a pediatric rheumatologist for corticosteroid injection therapy for symptoms related to the hindfoot or ankle. In these patients the diseased subtalar joint was targeted for therapy, often in conjunction with adjacent affected joints or tendon sheaths of the ankle. We used a protocol based on age, weight and joint for triamcinolone hexacetonide or triamcinolone acetonide dose prescription. We describe the technique for successful treatment of the subtalar joint.

RESULTS

A total of 241 subtalar joint corticosteroid injections were performed under US guidance, including 68 repeat injections for recurrent symptoms in 26 of the 122 children and young adults. The average time interval between repeat injections was 24.8 months (range 2.2-130.7 months, median 14.2 months). Subcutaneous tissue atrophy and skin hypopigmentation were the primary complications observed. These complications occurred in 3.9% of the injections.

CONCLUSION

With appropriate training and practice, the subtalar joint can be reliably and safely targeted with US-guided corticosteroid injection to treat symptoms related to juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

Ultrasound-guided joint injections for MR arthrography in pediatric patients: how we do it

In children, MR arthrography is typically performed using fluoroscopic guidance. This article explores the role of US-guided joint injections as an alternative for MR arthrography in children, discussing its advantages and disadvantages compared to standard methods. We describe techniques for performing US-guided injection of the shoulder, elbow, hip, knee, ankle and posterior subtalar joints, highlighting pertinent anatomy, routes of access and unique considerations for this modality in children. Written descriptions, images and links to video clips are used to illustrate proper arthrographic technique. We conclude that US provides effective guidance for intra-articular injection prior to MR arthrography, with the advantages of improved visualization of internal structures, reduced radiation exposure, convenience of performing the procedure portably and ease of performance. Although this paper does not address therapeutic steroid injections, these techniques could easily be translated for such purposes. We propose US guidance as a viable alternative to fluoroscopic technique for arthrography in children.

American Medical Society for Sports Medicine position statement: interventional musculoskeletal ultrasound in sports medicine

The use of diagnostic and interventional ultrasound has significantly increased over the past decade. A majority of the increased utilization is by nonradiologists. In sports medicine, ultrasound is often used to guide interventions such as aspirations, diagnostic or therapeutic injections, tenotomies, releases, and hydrodissections. This American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) position statement critically reviews the literature and evaluates the accuracy, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided injections in major, intermediate, and small joints, and soft tissues, all of which are commonly performed in sports medicine. New ultrasound-guided procedures and future trends are also briefly discussed. Based on the evidence, the official AMSSM position relevant to each subject is made.

American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) position statement: interventional musculoskeletal ultrasound in sports medicine

BACKGROUND

The use of diagnostic and interventional ultrasound has significantly increased over the past decade. A majority of the increased utilisation is by non-radiologists. In sports medicine, ultrasound is often used to guide interventions such as aspirations, diagnostic or therapeutic injections, tenotomies, releases and hydrodissections.

OBJECTIVE

Critically review the literature related to the accuracy, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided injections (USGIs) in major, intermediate and small joints; and soft tissues.

DESIGN

Systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

USGIs are more accurate than landmark-guided injections (LMGIs; strength of recommendation taxonomy (SORT) Evidence Rating=A). USGIs are more efficacious than LMGIs (SORT Evidence Rating=B). USGIs are more cost-effective than LMGIs (SORT Evidence Rating=B). Ultrasound guidance is required to perform many new procedures (SORT Evidence Rating=C).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this position statement indicate there is strong evidence that USGIs are more accurate than LMGI, moderate evidence that they are more efficacious and preliminary evidence that they are more cost-effective. Furthermore, ultrasound-guided (USG) is required to perform many new, advanced procedures and will likely enable the development of innovative USG surgical techniques in the future.

Can diagnostic injections predict the outcome in foot and ankle arthrodesis?

BACKGROUND

Intra-articular anesthetic drug injections are claimed to confirm the localization of the pain in order to treat the pain. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether a positive effect of injection could be indicative for a successful outcome of future arthrodesis.

METHODS

74 Patients underwent fluoroscopically guided and contrast confirmed anesthetic joint injections for diagnostic reasons. Before and after injection, pain was measured by use of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in rest and after exercise. Pain reduction was expressed as delta VAS (dVAS). Also, the Foot Function Index (FFI) was obtained. Based on the effect of the diagnostic injection and various clinical factors, patients were advised a conservative treatment (conservative group, n = 34) or an arthrodesis of the affected joint (operative group, n = 40). After a median follow-up period of 3.6 years (range 2.1 to 4.3 years) patients were again invited to complete the FFI and VAS in rest and after exercise. For data-analysis purposes the patients were assigned to four different groups, based on the result of injection and the occurrence of surgery. Wilcoxon signed rank tests and Mann Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Based on the analysis of the four groups we found that surgery, irrespective of the presence of pain reduction after injection, was related to improvement of VAS and FFI. Patients with conservative treatment always showed worse VAS and FFI scores, even when previous injections showed an improvement of VAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluoroscopically-guided anesthetic injections of the supposed painful foot-ankle joint seem not to be indicative for a successful outcome of an arthrodesis of the affected joint. However, the sole occurrence of surgery shows a significant difference in VAS and FFI scores, where conservative treatment does not. The local hospital review board granted permission for this study. Ethical approval was not required for this study.

The optimal injection technique for the osteoarthritic ankle: a randomized, cross-over trial

BACKGROUND

To optimize the injection technique for the osteoarthritic ankle in order to enhance the effect of intra-articular injections and minimize adverse events.

METHODS

Randomized cross-over trial. Comparing two injection techniques in patients with symptomatic ankle osteoarthritis. Patients received an injection with hyaluronic acid using either one of the techniques. Four weeks later the second injection was given using the other technique. Primary outcome was the failure rate of the injection.

RESULTS

Seventy patients fulfilled the study. The failure rate for both injection techniques was 24%. Forty-one patients in the traction group and thirty-nine in the group without traction experienced treatment related local adverse events. Other secondary outcomes did not show any difference between injection techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no significant difference comparing the two injection methods regarding any of our formulated outcome measures. The use of contrast aided fluoroscopy for injecting the severe osteoarthritic ankle can be advised at all times.

Ultrasound-guided first metatarsophalangeal joint injections: description of an in-plane, gel standoff technique in a cadaveric study

OBJECTIVE

To describe a longitudinal ultrasound-guided in-plane approach for injection into the first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint and assess its accuracy in a cadaveric model.

DESIGN

A prospective anatomical cadaver study model was used. A total of 10 first MTP joints using the described technique were injected with 0.5 mL of dye under ultrasound guidance. The joints were later dissected, and accuracy was classified as accurate, accurate with overflow, or inaccurate with no injectate in the target area.

RESULTS

Of the injections, 9 were classified as accurate injections, and 1 was classified accurate with overflow.

CONCLUSION

This cadaveric study suggests that ultrasound-guided injections of the first MTP joint can be accurately and reproducibly performed with a gel standoff, long-axis in-plane approach. This technique attempts to minimize the collateral damage to the surrounding tissue, specifically the articular cartilage. Clinicians should consider using this technique when performing ultrasound-guided injections to the first MTP joint.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Cadaveric, Level V.

The influence of ultrasound guidance in the rate of success of acromioclavicular joint injection: an experimental study on human cadavers

BACKGROUND

Injections of the acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) are performed routinely in patients with ACJ arthritis, both diagnostically and therapeutically. The aim of this prospective controlled study was to estimate the frequency of successful intra-articular ACJ injections with the aid of sonographic guidance versus non-guided ACJ injections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 80 cadaveric ACJs were injected with a solution containing methylene blue and subsequently dissected to distinguish intra- from peri-articular injections. In 40 cases the joint was punctured with sonographic guidance, whereas 40 joints were injected in the control group without the aid of ultrasound.

RESULTS

The rate of successful intra-articular ACJ injection was 90% (36 of 40) in the guided group and 70% (28 of 40) in the non-guided group. Ultrasound was significantly more accurate for correct intra-articular needle placement (P = .025).

DISCUSSION

The use of ultrasound significantly improves the accuracy of ACJ injection.

The posterolateral fluoroscopy-guided injection technique into the posterior subtalar joint: description of the procedure and pilot study on patient outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To describe a posterolateral fluoroscopy-guided injection technique into the posterior subtalar joint and to report patient outcomes 1 month post-injection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-three consecutive adult patients who underwent fluoroscopy-guided injection into the posterior subtalar joint using a direct posterolateral approach and who returned an outcomes-based postal questionnaire after receiving this injection were included. Numerical pain rating scale (NRS) data were collected prior to injection. NRS and Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scales were completed 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month after injection. The proportion of patients who improved was calculated for each time period. Baseline NRS data were compared to each time point using the Wilcoxon test to assess differences. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to compare the 20 min NRS score with all follow-up NRS scores. All available images were reviewed for the presence of subtalar osteoarthritis (OA). Patient charts were reviewed to identify characteristics of patients referred for subtalar injections. Risk ratios were calculated comparing presence of OA or other abnormalities with improvement.

RESULTS

A posterolateral approach for fluoroscopy-guided injections into the subtalar joint is described. There was a significant reduction in the mean NRS score at all time periods compared to baseline (p ≤ 0.004). One-third of patients (7/21) reported clinically relevant improvement at 1 month.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluoroscopy-guided puncture of the posterior subtalar joint using a posterolateral approach is possible. Clinically significant improvement is reported in 33% of patients after 1 month.

Midfoot arthrodesis following multi-joint stabilization with a novel hybrid plating system

BACKGROUND

Several methods for fixation have been described for midfoot arthrodesis. Multi-joint arthrodesis at this level can be challenging because of bone loss and deformity, making it difficult to obtain a stable construct. We present the results of a novel hybrid plating system that incorporates locked and non-locked compression screws for multi-joint arthrodesis of the midfoot.

METHOD

A retrospective multicenter review of patients undergoing multi-joint arthrodesis with hybrid plating of the midfoot was performed to evaluate the time to radiographic arthrodesis. Hybrid plating was defined as a construct that incorporates locked and non-locked compression screws. Neuropathy was the only exclusion criteria. Radiographic arthrodesis was defined as bridging bone on one of the three standard foot radiographs in the absence of a joint gap on the other views, or by 50% or greater bridging bone on computed tomography. Etiology of the arthritis, presurgical comorbidities, body mass index, functional level and postoperative complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were evaluated, and arthrodesis was obtained in 67 patients at 6 weeks in 27 patients, 9 weeks in 26, 12 weeks in 11, and at 16 weeks in three. In five patients at least one of the joints were not fused at 16 weeks and were considered a nonunion. Complications were present in 12 patients (17%).

CONCLUSIONS

The healing rate and time to arthrodesis compared favorably to similar published studies. Based on these results, hybrid plating was a reliable and consistent alternative for fixation in midfoot arthrodesis, especially in multi-joint disease.

Fluoroscopically guided diagnostic and therapeutic injections into foot articulations: report of short-term patient responses and comparison of outcomes between various injection sites

OBJECTIVE

A few studies have reported on short-term outcomes of patients receiving imaging-guided injections into the foot articulations, but none have compared patient responses depending on the anatomic site injected. This study includes a large sample size facilitating the investigation of postinjection pain reduction overall and by specific articulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three hundred forty-eight patients with imaging-guided diagnostic or therapeutic injections into the foot articulations, with complete preinjection and 20- to 30-minute postinjection numeric rating scale pain data were included. The proportions of patients reporting clinically relevant pain reduction (≥ 50%) were calculated overall and for specific subgroups. The risk ratio comparing patients with osteoarthritis to those without osteoarthritis was calculated. Analysis of variance was used to compare outcomes between subgroups of patients based on injection site. The unpaired Student t test was used to compare responses of men versus women, those with and without a diagnosis of osteoarthritis, and more experienced versus less experienced radiologists.

RESULTS

Sixty-four percent of patients (224/348) reported clinically relevant pain reduction. The average decrease overall was 56% (SD, 36). Injections into the Lisfranc articulation were significantly more effective (61% pain reduction, p = 0.007) compared with other sites, with 74% of patients obtaining clinically relevant pain relief. Patients with osteoarthritis reported more relief (62%) compared with those without (50%, p = 0.002). No difference in outcomes comparing musculoskeletal radiologists with residents or fellows in training was found.

CONCLUSION

Nearly two thirds of patients receiving imaging-guided injections into the foot articulations reported clinically relevant pain reduction. Lisfranc joint injections and patients with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis responded better.

US-guided injection of the upper and lower extremity joints

There is a growing interest in the application of ultrasound (US) guidance for diagnostic and therapeutic joint injections. US provides direct visualization of soft tissues and the outer borders of bony structures. With real-time needle guidance the success rate of intra-articular injections improves and iatrogenic damage to anatomic structures can be avoided. An US machine is more readily available, transferrable and more affordable than a fluoroscopy machine or CT scanner and lacks the risk of radiation. These factors make US a valuable alternative to procedures performed either blind or under fluoroscopic or CT guidance. This article focuses on the rationale for injections in the upper and lower extremity joints and describes and illustrates the different US-guided injection techniques.

Ultrasound versus anatomic guidance for intra-articular and periarticular injection: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical efficacy of ultrasound when compared with anatomic standard injection using palpation/anatomic landmarks.

METHODS

PubMed, Ovid Medline/Cochrane Reviews, BIOSIS Previews, and SPORTDiscus™ databases were searched to January 2011. To narrow the search, the following key search terms were used: ultrasound, guided, injection, joint, shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle. Fifteen articles were determined to be relevant, and an additional 2 articles were added after bibliography sections of the 15 articles were reviewed, resulting in a total of 17 articles meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Accuracy was greater in the ultrasound-guided group, independent of anatomic site. An improvement in time to symptom onset in the short term (< 6 weeks) was greatest with the use of ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection. Long-term outcomes are not proven to be different between intra-articular injection with ultrasound or anatomic guidance. The greatest trends were observed in the knee and shoulder joints, demonstrating improvements in function, pain, intensity, and range of motion, independent of injection technique. In foot/ankle and wrist/hand, small joint space injections showed a greater accuracy with ultrasound-guided injections contrasted to larger joint spaces, in which these joint injections demonstrated equal accuracy independent of injection technique.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review can confirm that accuracy is improved with the use of ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection. We can also confirm that short-term outcome improvements are present using ultrasound-guided injection techniques but can confirm no difference in long-term outcome measures using either technique.

Midfoot arthritis

Midfoot arthritis is a common cause of significant pain and disability. Although the medial tarsometatarsal (TMT) joints provide < 7 degrees of sagittal plane motion, the more mobile lateral fourth and fifth TMT joints provide balance and accommodation on uneven ground. These small constrained TMT joints also provide stability and translate the forward propulsion motion of the hindfoot and ankle joint to the forefoot metatarsophalangeal joints from heel rise to toe-off. Posttraumatic degeneration is the primary cause of midfoot arthritis, although primary degeneration and inflammatory conditions can also affect this area. The result is a painful midfoot that can no longer effectively transmit load from the hindfoot to the forefoot. Shoe modifications and orthotic inserts are the mainstay of nonsurgical management. Successful management of midfoot arthritis with orthoses is predicated on achieving adequate joint stabilization while still allowing function. Surgical intervention typically involves arthrodesis of the medial midfoot, although the best treatment of the more mobile lateral column is a subject of debate.