Loading…

How, When, Why in Magnetic Resonance Arthrography: an International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)

Objectives To perform an online survey about the use of magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in clinical practice. Methods We administered an online survey to all 1,550 members of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) about MRA asking ten different questions. Subgroup analysis wa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European radiology 2018-06, Vol.28 (6), p.2356-2368
Main Authors: Sconfienza, Luca Maria, Albano, Domenico, Messina, Carmelo, Silvestri, Enzo, Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63
container_end_page 2368
container_issue 6
container_start_page 2356
container_title European radiology
container_volume 28
creator Sconfienza, Luca Maria
Albano, Domenico
Messina, Carmelo
Silvestri, Enzo
Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano
description Objectives To perform an online survey about the use of magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in clinical practice. Methods We administered an online survey to all 1,550 members of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) about MRA asking ten different questions. Subgroup analysis was performed between general and orthopaedic hospitals using χ 2 and Mann-Whitney U statistics. Results One-hundred forty-eight answers were included (148/1,550, 9.5% of ESSR members). A median of 3,000 (interquartile range: 1,567.5-5,324.5) musculoskeletal MR examinations and a median of 125.5 MRAs (50.75-249) per institution were performed in 2016. Ratio between MRA and musculoskeletal MR was 4.7% (1.6%-9.0%). Using MRA, the most investigated joint was the shoulder followed by the hip (96.6%). The most common indications were the evaluation of instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1%). Fluoroscopy represented the preferred injection guidance. A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline is preferred in general hospitals, while pre-diluted Gadolinium-based syringes are mainly used in orthopaedic hospitals (P=.010). The number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (284;83.75-449.50) was higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (115.50;44.75-234.25). Conclusions One out of twenty MR examinations is a MRA, with higher prevalence in orthopaedic hospitals. The shoulder and the hip are the most investigated joints. Instability, labrum, and cuff are the most common indications. Key Points • The most common MRAs are shoulder and hip (96.6% of answers). • Most common clinical indications for MRA are instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1% of answers). • Fluoroscopy represents the preferred guidance to inject joints (61.0% of answers). • The median number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (n=284) was significantly higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (n=115.50). • A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline solution is preferred in general hospitals (64.8%) compared to orthopaedic hospitals (36.0%; P=0.010).
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00330-017-5208-y
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1989556669</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1992786063</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kV1rFDEUhoModlv9Ad5IwJsWHM3nTOJdKasttAi7ipchkzmzO3U2WZOMMn_A322WrSKCNzkXed73cHgQekHJG0pI8zYRwjmpCG0qyYiq5kdoQQVnFSVKPEYLormqGq3FCTpN6Z4QoqlonqITpjlVgqkF-nkdfrzGX7bgD--MB4_v7MZDHhxeQQreegf4MuZtDJto99v5HbYe3_gM0ds8FGDE6yl-hxm3M85bwMsphj0UaB3cAHnGocd3U3LTGNJXGCGXxMp2QxjDZsbny_V6dfEMPentmOD5wzxDn98vP11dV7cfP9xcXd5WTjCSK-Y4b2RNpWtl3_Ou47JjDaGuk6yxttNCNLzWPbdCKKHaDlqhLKGqdZK3tuZn6PzYu4_h2wQpm92QHIyj9RCmZKhWWsq6rnVBX_2D3oep3DweKM0aVZOaF4oeKRdDShF6s4_DzsbZUGIOksxRkimSzEGSmUvm5UPz1O6g-5P4baUA7Aik8uU3EP9a_d_WX84inRw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1992786063</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How, When, Why in Magnetic Resonance Arthrography: an International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Sconfienza, Luca Maria ; Albano, Domenico ; Messina, Carmelo ; Silvestri, Enzo ; Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</creator><creatorcontrib>Sconfienza, Luca Maria ; Albano, Domenico ; Messina, Carmelo ; Silvestri, Enzo ; Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives To perform an online survey about the use of magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in clinical practice. Methods We administered an online survey to all 1,550 members of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) about MRA asking ten different questions. Subgroup analysis was performed between general and orthopaedic hospitals using χ 2 and Mann-Whitney U statistics. Results One-hundred forty-eight answers were included (148/1,550, 9.5% of ESSR members). A median of 3,000 (interquartile range: 1,567.5-5,324.5) musculoskeletal MR examinations and a median of 125.5 MRAs (50.75-249) per institution were performed in 2016. Ratio between MRA and musculoskeletal MR was 4.7% (1.6%-9.0%). Using MRA, the most investigated joint was the shoulder followed by the hip (96.6%). The most common indications were the evaluation of instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1%). Fluoroscopy represented the preferred injection guidance. A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline is preferred in general hospitals, while pre-diluted Gadolinium-based syringes are mainly used in orthopaedic hospitals (P=.010). The number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (284;83.75-449.50) was higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (115.50;44.75-234.25). Conclusions One out of twenty MR examinations is a MRA, with higher prevalence in orthopaedic hospitals. The shoulder and the hip are the most investigated joints. Instability, labrum, and cuff are the most common indications. Key Points • The most common MRAs are shoulder and hip (96.6% of answers). • Most common clinical indications for MRA are instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1% of answers). • Fluoroscopy represents the preferred guidance to inject joints (61.0% of answers). • The median number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (n=284) was significantly higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (n=115.50). • A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline solution is preferred in general hospitals (64.8%) compared to orthopaedic hospitals (36.0%; P=0.010).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0938-7994</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1084</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5208-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29318428</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Adult ; Arthrography - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Diagnostic Radiology ; Dilution ; Europe ; Female ; Fluoroscopy ; Gadolinium ; Hip ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Imaging ; Injection guidance ; Internal Medicine ; Internet ; Interventional Radiology ; Joints - diagnostic imaging ; Labrum ; Magnetic resonance ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Male ; Median (statistics) ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Musculoskeletal ; Musculoskeletal Diseases - diagnosis ; Musculoskeletal System - diagnostic imaging ; Neuroradiology ; Radiology ; Resonance ; Saline solutions ; Shoulder ; Societies, Medical ; Stability ; Stability analysis ; Statistical analysis ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Syringes ; Ultrasound</subject><ispartof>European radiology, 2018-06, Vol.28 (6), p.2356-2368</ispartof><rights>European Society of Radiology 2018</rights><rights>European Radiology is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0759-8431</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29318428$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sconfienza, Luca Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albano, Domenico</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messina, Carmelo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestri, Enzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</creatorcontrib><title>How, When, Why in Magnetic Resonance Arthrography: an International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)</title><title>European radiology</title><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><description>Objectives To perform an online survey about the use of magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in clinical practice. Methods We administered an online survey to all 1,550 members of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) about MRA asking ten different questions. Subgroup analysis was performed between general and orthopaedic hospitals using χ 2 and Mann-Whitney U statistics. Results One-hundred forty-eight answers were included (148/1,550, 9.5% of ESSR members). A median of 3,000 (interquartile range: 1,567.5-5,324.5) musculoskeletal MR examinations and a median of 125.5 MRAs (50.75-249) per institution were performed in 2016. Ratio between MRA and musculoskeletal MR was 4.7% (1.6%-9.0%). Using MRA, the most investigated joint was the shoulder followed by the hip (96.6%). The most common indications were the evaluation of instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1%). Fluoroscopy represented the preferred injection guidance. A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline is preferred in general hospitals, while pre-diluted Gadolinium-based syringes are mainly used in orthopaedic hospitals (P=.010). The number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (284;83.75-449.50) was higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (115.50;44.75-234.25). Conclusions One out of twenty MR examinations is a MRA, with higher prevalence in orthopaedic hospitals. The shoulder and the hip are the most investigated joints. Instability, labrum, and cuff are the most common indications. Key Points • The most common MRAs are shoulder and hip (96.6% of answers). • Most common clinical indications for MRA are instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1% of answers). • Fluoroscopy represents the preferred guidance to inject joints (61.0% of answers). • The median number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (n=284) was significantly higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (n=115.50). • A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline solution is preferred in general hospitals (64.8%) compared to orthopaedic hospitals (36.0%; P=0.010).</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Arthrography - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Diagnostic Radiology</subject><subject>Dilution</subject><subject>Europe</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fluoroscopy</subject><subject>Gadolinium</subject><subject>Hip</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Injection guidance</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Interventional Radiology</subject><subject>Joints - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Labrum</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Median (statistics)</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Musculoskeletal</subject><subject>Musculoskeletal Diseases - diagnosis</subject><subject>Musculoskeletal System - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Neuroradiology</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Resonance</subject><subject>Saline solutions</subject><subject>Shoulder</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>Stability</subject><subject>Stability analysis</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Syringes</subject><subject>Ultrasound</subject><issn>0938-7994</issn><issn>1432-1084</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kV1rFDEUhoModlv9Ad5IwJsWHM3nTOJdKasttAi7ipchkzmzO3U2WZOMMn_A322WrSKCNzkXed73cHgQekHJG0pI8zYRwjmpCG0qyYiq5kdoQQVnFSVKPEYLormqGq3FCTpN6Z4QoqlonqITpjlVgqkF-nkdfrzGX7bgD--MB4_v7MZDHhxeQQreegf4MuZtDJto99v5HbYe3_gM0ds8FGDE6yl-hxm3M85bwMsphj0UaB3cAHnGocd3U3LTGNJXGCGXxMp2QxjDZsbny_V6dfEMPentmOD5wzxDn98vP11dV7cfP9xcXd5WTjCSK-Y4b2RNpWtl3_Ou47JjDaGuk6yxttNCNLzWPbdCKKHaDlqhLKGqdZK3tuZn6PzYu4_h2wQpm92QHIyj9RCmZKhWWsq6rnVBX_2D3oep3DweKM0aVZOaF4oeKRdDShF6s4_DzsbZUGIOksxRkimSzEGSmUvm5UPz1O6g-5P4baUA7Aik8uU3EP9a_d_WX84inRw</recordid><startdate>20180601</startdate><enddate>20180601</enddate><creator>Sconfienza, Luca Maria</creator><creator>Albano, Domenico</creator><creator>Messina, Carmelo</creator><creator>Silvestri, Enzo</creator><creator>Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0759-8431</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180601</creationdate><title>How, When, Why in Magnetic Resonance Arthrography: an International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)</title><author>Sconfienza, Luca Maria ; Albano, Domenico ; Messina, Carmelo ; Silvestri, Enzo ; Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Arthrography - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Diagnostic Radiology</topic><topic>Dilution</topic><topic>Europe</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fluoroscopy</topic><topic>Gadolinium</topic><topic>Hip</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Injection guidance</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Interventional Radiology</topic><topic>Joints - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Labrum</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Median (statistics)</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Musculoskeletal</topic><topic>Musculoskeletal Diseases - diagnosis</topic><topic>Musculoskeletal System - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Neuroradiology</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Resonance</topic><topic>Saline solutions</topic><topic>Shoulder</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>Stability</topic><topic>Stability analysis</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Syringes</topic><topic>Ultrasound</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sconfienza, Luca Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albano, Domenico</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Messina, Carmelo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvestri, Enzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sconfienza, Luca Maria</au><au>Albano, Domenico</au><au>Messina, Carmelo</au><au>Silvestri, Enzo</au><au>Tagliafico, Alberto Stefano</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How, When, Why in Magnetic Resonance Arthrography: an International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)</atitle><jtitle>European radiology</jtitle><stitle>Eur Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><date>2018-06-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>2356</spage><epage>2368</epage><pages>2356-2368</pages><issn>0938-7994</issn><eissn>1432-1084</eissn><abstract>Objectives To perform an online survey about the use of magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in clinical practice. Methods We administered an online survey to all 1,550 members of the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) about MRA asking ten different questions. Subgroup analysis was performed between general and orthopaedic hospitals using χ 2 and Mann-Whitney U statistics. Results One-hundred forty-eight answers were included (148/1,550, 9.5% of ESSR members). A median of 3,000 (interquartile range: 1,567.5-5,324.5) musculoskeletal MR examinations and a median of 125.5 MRAs (50.75-249) per institution were performed in 2016. Ratio between MRA and musculoskeletal MR was 4.7% (1.6%-9.0%). Using MRA, the most investigated joint was the shoulder followed by the hip (96.6%). The most common indications were the evaluation of instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1%). Fluoroscopy represented the preferred injection guidance. A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline is preferred in general hospitals, while pre-diluted Gadolinium-based syringes are mainly used in orthopaedic hospitals (P=.010). The number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (284;83.75-449.50) was higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (115.50;44.75-234.25). Conclusions One out of twenty MR examinations is a MRA, with higher prevalence in orthopaedic hospitals. The shoulder and the hip are the most investigated joints. Instability, labrum, and cuff are the most common indications. Key Points • The most common MRAs are shoulder and hip (96.6% of answers). • Most common clinical indications for MRA are instability, labrum, and rotator cuff (85.1% of answers). • Fluoroscopy represents the preferred guidance to inject joints (61.0% of answers). • The median number of MRA performed at orthopaedic hospitals (n=284) was significantly higher (P=.006) than that performed at general hospitals (n=115.50). • A self-prepared mixture of Gadolinium/saline solution is preferred in general hospitals (64.8%) compared to orthopaedic hospitals (36.0%; P=0.010).</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>29318428</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00330-017-5208-y</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0759-8431</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0938-7994
ispartof European radiology, 2018-06, Vol.28 (6), p.2356-2368
issn 0938-7994
1432-1084
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1989556669
source Springer Link
subjects Adult
Arthrography - statistics & numerical data
Diagnostic Radiology
Dilution
Europe
Female
Fluoroscopy
Gadolinium
Hip
Hospitals
Humans
Imaging
Injection guidance
Internal Medicine
Internet
Interventional Radiology
Joints - diagnostic imaging
Labrum
Magnetic resonance
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data
Male
Median (statistics)
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Musculoskeletal
Musculoskeletal Diseases - diagnosis
Musculoskeletal System - diagnostic imaging
Neuroradiology
Radiology
Resonance
Saline solutions
Shoulder
Societies, Medical
Stability
Stability analysis
Statistical analysis
Surveys and Questionnaires
Syringes
Ultrasound
title How, When, Why in Magnetic Resonance Arthrography: an International Survey by the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T18%3A37%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How,%20When,%20Why%20in%20Magnetic%20Resonance%20Arthrography:%20an%20International%20Survey%20by%20the%20European%20Society%20of%20Musculoskeletal%20Radiology%20(ESSR)&rft.jtitle=European%20radiology&rft.au=Sconfienza,%20Luca%20Maria&rft.date=2018-06-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=2356&rft.epage=2368&rft.pages=2356-2368&rft.issn=0938-7994&rft.eissn=1432-1084&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00330-017-5208-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1992786063%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-2c3375615cb5ff3dd35d2701cd527aad9447369f3a44848bdeb48a018bc53ba63%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1992786063&rft_id=info:pmid/29318428&rfr_iscdi=true