Assessment of glycosaminoglycan content in intervertebral discs using chemical exchange saturation transfer at 3.0 Tesla: preliminary results in patients with low-back pain.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate glycosaminoglycan-dependent chemical exchange saturation transfer (gagCEST) imaging at 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for quantification of glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content in intervertebral discs (IVDs) in patients with low-back pain (LBP). METHODS: Sixteen patients with LBP were examined in this Institutional Review Board-approved study using a clinical whole-body system. The MRI protocol included standard morphological imaging, sagittal T2-mapping and gagCEST imaging. IVD grading according to the Pfirrmann score and region-of-interest analysis of the annulus fibrosus (AF) and the nucleus pulposus (NP) in gagCEST and T2 maps were performed before data were statistically tested for correlations between imaging techniques and quantitative differences between different grades of IVD degeneration. RESULTS: GagCEST values of the NP were significantly (P < 0.001) lower in degenerative IVDs (Pfirrmann 3 + 4) compared with non-degenerative IVDs (Pfirrmann 1 + 2), but only a weak linear correlation (r = 0.299) with the T2 relaxation times was found. GagCEST values of the NP exhibited a moderate negative correlation with Pfirrmann grades (r = -0.449). CONCLUSIONS: The known loss of GAG in the NP with increasing grade of morphological degeneration can be assessed using gagCEST imaging at 3.0 T. The correlation with single Pfirrmann grades and T2 relaxation times only seems to be moderate, indicating a substantial difference in information provided by the techniques.

Modular megaprostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the femur.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) of the femur remain challenging, especially in patients with previous multiple revisions. Modular megaprostheses (mMPs) are rarely used in this indication; however, in some cases mMPs seem to be the last chance for limb salvage. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome of PPFs of the femur treated by modular mMPs at our institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study 33 patients (27 female; mean age 79 years) with a PPF after total hip or total knee arthroplasty (no tumor indications) were treated using modular proximal (mPFR; n = 12), distal (mDFR; n = 14) or total (mTFR; n = 7) femur replacement. A retrospective evaluation regarding mortality and revision rates was performed. Failures with need for revision were classified. RESULTS: At a mean follow up of 60 months (range 0-178 months), the total mortality rate as well as total revision rate were both found to be 39%. At 1 year follow-up the mortality rate was highest within the mDFR group, and less revisions were necessary in the mPFR group, however both findings were not significantly. Those patients, who had revision surgery before PPF, were found to have higher revision rate after implantation of mMP. In the mPFR group, dislocation was the most frequent failure, within the mDFR and the mTFR group infection. In one case amputation of the lower limb was necessary. CONCLUSION: mMPs represent a valuable option in PPFs of the femur. Infection and dislocation remain the most frequent complications. Prospective clinical studies are required to further define the outcome of mMPs in PPFs of the femur.