Ultrasound Imaging of Cutaneous Innervations of the Lower Extremity.

Ultrasound (US) is commonly used to evaluate the cutaneous innervation of the lower extremity, owing to the following advantages: (1) US is a high-resolution soft tissue imaging modality; (2) it is feasible in patients who are deemed unsuitable to undergo magnetic resonance imaging; and (3) it enables dynamic and real-time imaging. The evaluation of cutaneous nerves requires accurate knowledge of the anatomy as well as technical details. We present a review of the US anatomy of the cutaneous nerves in the lower extremity in addition to a description of a few pathologic conditions.

Distinguishing necrotizing from non-necrotizing fasciitis: a new predictive scoring integrating MRI in the LRINEC score.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a scoring system integrating MRI and laboratory findings to differentiate necrotizing fasciitis (NF) from non-necrotizing fasciitis (non-NF). METHODS: This retrospective study included 144 subjects who underwent surgery in one of three tertiary referral centers for NF or cellulitis with non-NF. The development cohort consisted of 96 subjects (NF = 47; non-NF = 49) from one center, and the validation cohort consisted of 48 subjects (NF = 23; cellulitis with non-NF = 25) from two different centers. The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) scoring system and five MRI findings (thickening of the intermuscular deep fascia ≥ 3 mm, extensive involvement of the deep fascia, multi-compartmental involvement in one extremity, presence of gas, and contrast-enhancement pattern) were included in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors of NF. An additive scoring system was developed using the coefficients of the final regression model. Model performance was assessed for discrimination and calibration. The scoring system was externally validated. RESULT: The final scoring system consisted of three variables: thickening of the deep fascia ≥ 3 mm, multi-compartmental involvement, and LRINEC score. The new predictive model showed improved performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.862; positive and negative predictive values, 82% and 79%, respectively), compared with the LRINEC score alone (0.814, 77% and 67%, respectively). The model also showed good discrimination with the external validation dataset (AUC, 0.933). CONCLUSIONS: Differentiation of NF from severe cellulitis with non-NF can be achieved with the new predictive scoring system. KEY POINTS: • The new predictive scoring system integrating two MRI findings with the LRINEC score can help in the differentiation of necrotizing fasciitis from severe cellulitis with non-necrotizing fasciitis. • Thickening of the deep fascia ≥ 3 mm and multi-compartmental involvement were the most important MRI findings for the differentiation.

MR evaluation of the meniscal ramp lesion in patients with anterior cruciate ligament tear.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the findings on magnetic resonance imaging most strongly associated with meniscal ramp lesions in patients with an anterior cruciate ligament tear. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight consecutive patients (mean age, 33.7 years; 64 male, 14 female) with an arthroscopically proven anterior cruciate ligament tear were included in this retrospective study. The presence of the following six features on magnetic resonance images were recorded: complete fluid filling between the posterior horn of the medial meniscus and the capsule margin; edema affecting the posterior capsule; irregularity of the medial meniscus at the posterior margin; fluid at the periphery of the medial meniscus; the corner notch sign; and a vertical tear at the medial meniscus. Findings at arthroscopy served as the reference standard. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and interobserver agreement were calculated. RESULTS: Seven ramp lesions were noted on arthroscopy (9%). Findings of irregularity at the posterior margin (p = 0.001) and complete fluid filling between the posterior horn of the medial meniscus and the capsule margin (p = 0.004) on magnetic resonance imaging were significantly associated with the presence of a ramp lesion. With the irregularity at the posterior margin, sensitivity was 86% and specificity was 79%. Complete fluid filling sign showed sensitivity of 57% and specificity of 92%. Concordance of the two readers for the six magnetic resonance imaging features was fair to very good (k = 0.38-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Irregularity at posterior margin and complete fluid filling were most sensitive findings for detecting of a ramp lesion on magnetic resonance imaging.

Magnetic resonance imaging spectrum of spinal meningioma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings of spinal meningioma and to determine the radiological subtypes based on the MR imaging findings and their respective clinical features. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data for 105 patients with surgically treated and histopathologically diagnosed spinal meningiomas at our hospital between May 1, 2003 and May 1, 2017 were evaluated in this study. Two radiologists reviewed the characteristics of spinal meningiomas on MR images and categorized the spinal meningiomas into subtypes based on MR imaging findings. RESULTS: Most spinal meningiomas showed higher signal intensity than that of the spinal cord but lower than that of the subcutaneous fat on T2-weighted images (WI). 56 cases (54%) showed adjacent spinal cord signal changes. Meningiomas could be categorized according to MR imaging findings into type A: dural-based tumors with a homogeneous signal intensity and intense contrast enhancement (81 cases, 77%); type B: round or oval-shaped tumors with an internal hypointense portion on T2-weighted images (18 cases, 17%); type C: en plaque tumors (three cases, 3%); and type D: tumors with unusual findings and a heterogeneous appearance (three cases, 3%). All type C patients showed spinal cord signal changes. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal meningioma showed slightly high signal intensity rather than high signal intensity on T2-weighted images. Spinal cord signal changes were present in more than half of the cases. Clinical differences were observed among the different MR imaging types.

Spine MR images in patients with pedicle screw fixation: Comparison of conventional and SEMAC-VAT sequences at 1.5 T.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Slice-encoding metal artifact corrections (SEMAC)-view-angle tilting (VAT) sequences have recently been used in clinical protocols to reduce metal artifacts in MR scans of patients with spinal instrumentation. The objective of this study was to compare the SEMAC-VAT sequence with the conventional MR sequence with a low bandwidth turbo-spin echo (TSE) in terms of image quality, visibility of periprosthetic structures, and diagnostic confidence for detection of postoperative complications in patients who underwent pedicle screw fixation at 1.5 T. METHODS: Seventy patients who underwent pedicle screw fixation between the thoracic vertebrae and the sacrum were included in the study. The MR scans were retrospectively evaluated by two radiologists for signal-to-noise ratio of anatomical structures and size of artifacts, visibility of periprosthetic anatomical structures, and diagnostic confidence for detection of postoperative complications on conventional TSE and on SEMAC-VAT images. Paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for comparisons, and kappa values were used for inter-observer agreement. RESULTS: SEMAC-VAT images demonstrated significantly fewer metal artifacts, providing improved delineation of most periprosthetic anatomical structures and higher diagnostic confidence for detection of postoperative complications compared with conventional TSE images (p < 0.001). For the spinal canal, however, the visibility of anatomical structures and diagnostic confidence for detection of postoperative complications were better for conventional TSE than for SEMAC-VAT imaging (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, although SEMAC-VAT can significantly reduce metal artifact and provide improved delineation of periprosthetic anatomical structures compared to conventional TSE images, TSE is better for spinal canal evaluation. Therefore, it is important to understand the advantages and disadvantages of SEMAC-VAT and to use it properly.