Radiology, Vol 153, 611-613, Copyright © 1984 by Radiological Society of North America
Elbow arthrography: a reassessment of the technique
MM Teng, WA Murphy, LA Gilula, JM Destouet, G Edelstein, B Monsees and WG Totty
Twenty-six elbow arthrograms were retrospectively reviewed. Each arthrogram
consisted of conventional radiography, conventional tomography, standard
double-contrast arthrography, and arthrotomography. Each of these four
components was independently interpreted in a blinded fashion by six
radiologists, each working alone. The four components were evaluated for
presence or absence of intraarticular bodies, cartilage loss, or fractures.
The results showed that conventional tomography was the most accurate
single study. Arthrotomography rarely improved the diagnostic accuracy of
noncontrast methods. It was useful in those few patients where detection of
purely cartilaginous bodies, precise position of mineralized densities, or
status of articular cartilage was desired. It may be possible to reduce the
number of elbow arthrograms, thereby reducing time, cost, and radiation
dose factors.
