Download PDF
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2022; 26(03): 242-257
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740996
Review Article

Postoperative Musculoskeletal Imaging and Interventions Following Hip Preservation Surgery, Deformity Correction, and Hip Arthroplasty

Mohammad Samim
1   Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
,
Iman Khodarahmi
1   Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
,
Christopher Burke
1   Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
,
Jan Fritz 
1   Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Total hip arthroplasty and hip preservation surgeries have substantially increased over the past few decades. Musculoskeletal imaging and interventions are cornerstones of comprehensive postoperative care and surveillance in patients undergoing established and more recently introduced hip surgeries. Hence the radiologist's role continues to evolve and expand. A strong understanding of hip joint anatomy and biomechanics, surgical procedures, expected normal postoperative imaging appearances, and postoperative complications ensures accurate imaging interpretation, intervention, and optimal patient care. This article presents surgical principles and procedural details pertinent to postoperative imaging evaluation strategies after common hip surgeries, such as radiography, ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. We review and illustrate the expected postoperative imaging appearances and complications following chondrolabral repair, acetabuloplasty, osteochondroplasty, periacetabular osteotomy, realigning and derotational femoral osteotomies, and hip arthroplasty.

Keywords

magnetic resonance imaging - computed tomography - hip - surgery - arthroplasty


Publication History

Article published online:
02 June 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Mills MK, Strickland CD, Jesse MK, Lowry PA, Mei-Dan O, Flug JA. Postoperative imaging in the setting of hip preservation surgery. Radiographics 2016; 36 (06) 1746-1758
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Truntzer JN, Shapiro LM, Hoppe DJ, Abrams GD, Safran MR. Hip arthroscopy in the United States: an update following coding changes in 2011. J Hip Preserv Surg 2017; 4 (03) 250-257
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Fritz J, Lurie B, Miller TT. Imaging of hip arthroplasty. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2013; 17 (03) 316-327
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Khodarahmi I, Fishman EK, Fritz J. Dedicated CT and MRI techniques for the evaluation of the postoperative knee. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2018; 22 (04) 444-456
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ghodasara N, Yi PH, Clark K, Fishman EK, Farshad M, Fritz J. Postoperative spinal CT: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics 2019; 39 (06) 1840-1861
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Khodarahmi I, Isaac A, Fishman EK, Dalili D, Fritz J. Metal about the hip and artifact reduction techniques: from basic concepts to advanced Imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2019; 23 (03) e68-e81
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hackenbroch C, Schüle S, Halt D, Zengerle L, Beer M. Metal artifact reduction with tin prefiltration in computed tomography: a cadaver study for comparison with other novel techniques. Invest Radiol 2021; September 2 ( Epub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Bolstad K, Flatabø S, Aadnevik D, Dalehaug I, Vetti N. Metal artifact reduction in CT, a phantom study: subjective and objective evaluation of four commercial metal artifact reduction algorithms when used on three different orthopedic metal implants. Acta Radiol 2018; 59 (09) 1110-1118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Khodarahmi I, Haroun RR, Lee M. et al. Metal artifact reduction computed tomography of arthroplasty implants: effects of combined modeled iterative reconstruction and dual-energy virtual monoenergetic extrapolation at higher photon energies. Invest Radiol 2018; 53 (12) 728-735
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Fritz J, Fishman EK, Corl F, Carrino JA, Weber KL, Fayad LM. Imaging of limb salvage surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 198 (03) 647-660
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Khodarahmi I, Nittka M, Fritz J. Leaps in technology: advanced MR imaging after total hip arthroplasty. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2017; 21 (05) 604-615
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Khodarahmi I, Fritz J, Advanced MR. Advanced MR imaging after total hip arthroplasty: the clinical impact. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2017; 21 (05) 616-629
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Fritz J, Lurie B, Miller TT, Potter HG. MR imaging of hip arthroplasty implants. Radiographics 2014; 34 (04) E106-E132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fritz J, Lurie B, Potter HG. MR imaging of knee arthroplasty implants. Radiographics 2015; 35 (05) 1483-1501
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Fritz J, Fritz B, Thawait GK. et al. Advanced metal artifact reduction MRI of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty implants: compressed sensing acceleration enables the time-neutral use of SEMAC. Skeletal Radiol 2016; 45 (10) 1345-1356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fritz J, Ahlawat S, Demehri S. et al. Compressed sensing SEMAC: 8-fold accelerated high resolution metal artifact reduction MRI of cobalt-chromium knee arthroplasty implants. Invest Radiol 2016; 51 (10) 666-676
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Fritz J, Guggenberger R, Del Grande F. Rapid musculoskeletal MRI in 2021: clinical application of advanced accelerated techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021; 216 (03) 718-733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Khodarahmi I, Fritz J. The value of 3 tesla field strength for musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2021; 56 (11) 749-763
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Khodarahmi I, Rajan S, Sterling R, Koch K, Kirsch J, Fritz J. Heating of hip arthroplasty implants during metal artifact reduction MRI at 1.5- and 3.0-T field strengths. Invest Radiol 2021; 56 (04) 232-243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bedi A, Kelly BT, Khanduja V. Arthroscopic hip preservation surgery: current concepts and perspective. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B (01) 10-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Beck M, Leunig M, Parvizi J, Boutier V, Wyss D, Ganz R. Anterior femoroacetabular impingement: part II. Midterm results of surgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (418) 67-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ng VY, Arora N, Best TM, Pan X, Ellis TJ. Efficacy of surgery for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38 (11) 2337-2345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Meftah M, Rodriguez JA, Panagopoulos G, Alexiades MM. Long-term results of arthroscopic labral debridement: predictors of outcomes. Orthopedics 2011; 34 (10) e588-e592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Domb BG, Gui C, Lodhia P. How much arthritis is too much for hip arthroscopy: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (03) 520-529
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Li AE, Jawetz ST, Greditzer IV HG, Burge AJ, Nawabi DH, Potter HG. MRI evaluation of femoroacetabular impingement after hip preservation surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 207 (02) 392-400
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Harris JD, McCormick FM, Abrams GD. et al. Complications and reoperations during and after hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of 92 studies and more than 6,000 patients. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (03) 589-595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Samim M, Youm T, Burke C, Meislin R, Vigdorchik J, Gyftopoulos S. Hip arthroscopy-MRI correlation and differences for hip anatomy and pathology: what radiologists need to know. Clin Imaging 2018; 52: 315-327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mauro CS, Voos JE, Kelly BT. Femoroacetabular impingement surgical techniques. Oper Tech Orthop 2010; 20 (04) 223-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Byrd JWT. Femoroacetabular impingement in athletes: current concepts. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (03) 737-751
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Leunig M, Robertson WJ, Ganz R. Femoroacetabular impingement: diagnosis and management, including open surgical technique. Oper Tech Sports Med 2007; 15 (04) 178-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kelly BT, Weiland DE, Schenker ML, Philippon MJ. Arthroscopic labral repair in the hip: surgical technique and review of the literature. Arthroscopy 2005; 21 (12) 1496-1504
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Byrd JWT, Jones KS. Primary repair of the acetabular labrum: outcomes with 2 years' follow-up. Arthroscopy 2014; 30 (05) 588-592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Al Mana L, Coughlin RP, Desai V, Simunovic N, Duong A, Ayeni OR. The hip labrum reconstruction: indications and outcomes—an updated systematic review. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2019; 12 (02) 156-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Gédouin J-E. Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: technical review. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2012; 98 (05) 583-596
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Mithoefer K, Williams III RJI, Warren RF. et al. The microfracture technique for the treatment of articular cartilage lesions in the knee. A prospective cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (09) 1911-1920
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 McCormick F, Kleweno CP, Kim YJ, Martin SD. Vascular safe zones in hip arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39 (Suppl): 64S-71S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Philippon MJ, Stubbs AJ, Schenker ML, Maxwell RB, Ganz R, Leunig M. Arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement: osteoplasty technique and literature review. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35 (09) 1571-1580
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Ross JR, Larson CM, Adeoye O, Kelly BT, Bedi A, Bedi A. Residual deformity is the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy: a three-dimensional CT study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (04) 1388-1395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Mardones RM, Gonzalez C, Chen Q, Zobitz M, Kaufman KR, Trousdale RT. Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: evaluation of the effect of the size of the resection. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (1, Suppl 1 Pt 1): 84-91
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Benali Y, Katthagen BD. Hip subluxation as a complication of arthroscopic debridement. Arthroscopy 2009; 25 (04) 405-407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Nakano N, Khanduja V. Complications in hip arthroscopy. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J 2016; 6 (03) 402-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Laorr A, Greenspan A, Anderson MW, Moehring HD, McKinley T. Traumatic hip dislocation: early MRI findings. Skeletal Radiol 1995; 24 (04) 239-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Ilizaliturri Jr VM. Complications of arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement treatment: a review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (03) 760-768
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Beck M. Groin pain after open FAI surgery: the role of intraarticular adhesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (03) 769-774
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Dudda M, Mamisch TC, Krueger A, Werlen S, Siebenrock KA, Beck M. Hip arthroscopy after surgical hip dislocation: is predictive imaging possible?. Arthroscopy 2011; 27 (04) 486-492
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Cvetanovich GL, Harris JD, Erickson BJ, Bach Jr BR, Bush-Joseph CA, Nho SJ. Revision hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of diagnoses, operative findings, and outcomes. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (07) 1382-1390
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Sink EL, Beaulé PE, Sucato D. et al. Multicenter study of complications following surgical dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93 (12) 1132-1136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Millis MB, Kim Y-J. Rationale of osteotomy and related procedures for hip preservation: a review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; (405) 108-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Siebenrock KA, Schaller C, Tannast M, Keel M, Büchler L. Anteverting periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic acetabular retroversion: results at ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (21) 1785-1792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA. Femoral antetorsion: comparing asymptomatic volunteers and patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology 2012; 263 (02) 475-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Staheli LT, Clawson DK, Hubbard DD. Medial femoral torsion: experience with operative treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1980; (146) 222-225
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Nelitz M. Femoral derotational osteotomies. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2018; 11 (02) 272-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Nelitz M, Wehner T, Steiner M, Dürselen L, Lippacher S. The effects of femoral external derotational osteotomy on frontal plane alignment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (11) 2740-2746
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Evans JT, Evans JP, Walker RW, Blom AW, Whitehouse MR, Sayers A. How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet 2019; 393 (10172): 647-654
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Chang CY, Huang AJ, Palmer WE. Radiographic evaluation of hip implants. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2015; 19 (01) 12-20
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Roth TD, Maertz NA, Parr JA, Buckwalter KA, Choplin RH. CT of the hip prosthesis: appearance of components, fixation, and complications. Radiographics 2012; 32 (04) 1089-1107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Germann C, Filli L, Jungmann PM. et al. Prospective and longitudinal evolution of postoperative periprosthetic findings on metal artifact-reduced MR imaging in asymptomatic patients after uncemented total hip arthroplasty. Skeletal Radiol 2021; 50 (06) 1177-1188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Khodarahmi I, Kirsch J, Chang G, Fritz J. Metal artifacts of hip arthroplasty implants at 1.5-T and 3.0-T: a closer look into the B1 effects. Skeletal Radiol 2021; 50 (05) 1007-1015
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Pivec R, Issa K, Kapadia BH. et al. Incidence and future projections of periprosthetic femoral fracture following primary total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of international registry data. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2015; 25 (04) 269-275
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Yi PH, Della Valle CJ, Fishman EK, Fritz J. Imaging of periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee. Semin Roentgenol 2021; 56 (01) 90-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Filli L, Jungmann PM, Zingg PO. et al. MRI with state-of-the-art metal artifact reduction after total hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic findings in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Eur Radiol 2020; 30 (04) 2241-2252
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Sadoghi P, Liebensteiner M, Agreiter M, Leithner A, Böhler N, Labek G. Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (08) 1329-1332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Burge AJ. Total hip arthroplasty: MR imaging of complications unrelated to metal wear. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2015; 19 (01) 31-39
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Foti G, Fighera A, Campacci A. et al. Diagnostic performance of dual-energy CT for detecting painful hip prosthesis loosening. Radiology 2021; 300 (03) 641-649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Karachalios T, Komnos G, Koutalos A. Total hip arthroplasty: survival and modes of failure. EFORT Open Rev 2018; 3 (05) 232-239
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K. et al. The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (05) 1309-1314.e2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Plodkowski AJ, Hayter CL, Miller TT, Nguyen JT, Potter HG. Lamellated hyperintense synovitis: potential MR imaging sign of an infected knee arthroplasty. Radiology 2013; 266 (01) 256-260
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Galley J, Sutter R, Stern C, Filli L, Rahm S, Pfirrmann CWA. Diagnosis of periprosthetic hip joint infection using MRI with metal artifact reduction at 1.5 T. Radiology 2020; 296 (01) 98-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Schwaiger BJ, Gassert FT, Suren C. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI with metal artifact reduction for the detection of periprosthetic joint infection and aseptic loosening of total hip arthroplasty. Eur J Radiol 2020; 131: 109253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Ollivere B, Wimhurst JA, Clark IM, Donell ST. Current concepts in osteolysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94 (01) 10-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Perino G, De Martino I, Zhang L. et al. The contribution of the histopathological examination to the diagnosis of adverse local tissue reactions in arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 2021; 6 (06) 399-419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Pellicci PM, Potter HG, Foo LF, Boettner F. MRI shows biologic restoration of posterior soft tissue repairs after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467 (04) 940-945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Cooper HJ, Ranawat AS, Potter HG, Foo LF, Koob TW, Ranawat CS. Early reactive synovitis and osteolysis after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (12) 3278-3285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Walde TA, Weiland DE, Leung SB. et al. Comparison of CT, MRI, and radiographs in assessing pelvic osteolysis: a cadaveric study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; (437) 138-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Germann C, Nanz D, Sutter R. Magnetic resonance imaging around metal at 1.5 tesla: techniques from basic to advanced and clinical impact. Invest Radiol 2021; 56 (11) 734-748
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Nawabi DH, Gold S, Lyman S, Fields K, Padgett DE, Potter HG. MRI predicts ALVAL and tissue damage in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (02) 471-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Pandit H, Glyn-Jones S, McLardy-Smith P. et al. Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90 (07) 847-851
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Mortazavi SM, Hansen P, Zmistowski B, Kane PW, Restrepo C, Parvizi J. Hematoma following primary total hip arthroplasty: a grave complication. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (03) 498-503
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Kolber MK, Shukla PA, Kumar A, Zybulewski A, Markowitz T, Silberzweig JE. Endovascular management of recurrent spontaneous hemarthrosis after arthroplasty. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2017; 40 (02) 216-222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Hash II TW, Maderazo AB, Haas SB, Saboeiro GR, Trost DW, Potter HG. Magnetic resonance angiography in the management of recurrent hemarthrosis after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26 (08) 1357-61.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Glynn AA, Barattiero FY, Albers CE, Hanke MS, Steppacher SD, Tannast M. Surgical hip dislocation does not result in atrophy or fatty infiltration of periarticular hip muscles. J Hip Preserv Surg 2014; 1 (02) 82-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Krüger DR, Heller KD. Hip abductor deficiency after total hip arthroplasty: diagnostic and therapeutic methods. Z Orthop Unfall 2021; July 14 (Epub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Bricteux S, Beguin L, Fessy MH. Iliopsoas impingement in 12 patients with a total hip arthroplasty [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Repar Appar Mot 2001; 87 (08) 820-825
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Henderson RA, Lachiewicz PF. Groin pain after replacement of the hip: aetiology, evaluation and treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94 (02) 145-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Potter HG, Nestor BJ, Sofka CM, Ho ST, Peters LE, Salvati EA. Magnetic resonance imaging after total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of periprosthetic soft tissue. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86 (09) 1947-1954
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Su EP. Post-operative neuropathy after total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B (1, Suppl): 46-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Hasija R, Kelly JJ, Shah NV. et al. Nerve injuries associated with total hip arthroplasty. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2018; 9 (01) 81-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 DeHart MM, Riley Jr LH. Nerve injuries in total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1999; 7 (02) 101-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Ahlawat S, Stern SE, Belzberg AJ, Fritz J. High-resolution metal artifact reduction MR imaging of the lumbosacral plexus in patients with metallic implants. Skeletal Radiol 2017; 46 (07) 897-908
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Deshmukh S, Omar IM. Imaging of hip arthroplasties: normal findings and hardware complications. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2019; 23 (02) 162-176
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Douis H, Dunlop DJ, Pearson AM, O'Hara JN, James SLJ. The role of ultrasound in the assessment of post-operative complications following hip arthroplasty. Skeletal Radiol 2012; 41 (09) 1035-1046
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Goldman LH, Perronne L, Alaia EF. et al. Does magnetic resonance imaging after diagnostic ultrasound for soft tissue masses change clinical management?. J Ultrasound Med 2021; 40 (08) 1515-1522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Sdao S, Orlandi D, Aliprandi A. et al. The role of ultrasonography in the assessment of peri-prosthetic hip complications. J Ultrasound 2014; 18 (03) 245-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 Payne JM. Ultrasound-guided hip procedures. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2016; 27 (03) 607-629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Friedman T, Miller TT. MR imaging and ultrasound correlation of hip pathologic conditions. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2013; 21 (01) 183-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Haskel JD, Kaplan DJ, Fried JW, Youm T, Samim M, Burke C. The limited reliability of physical examination and imaging for diagnosis of iliopsoas tendinitis. Arthroscopy 2021; 37 (04) 1170-1178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Li R, Lu Q, Chai W, Hao L-B, Lu S-B, Chen J-Y. Saline solution lavage and reaspiration for culture with a blood culture system is a feasible method for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection in patients with insufficient synovial fluid. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2019; 101 (11) 1004-1009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 98 Mitchell WG, Kettwich SC, Sibbitt Jr WL. et al. Outcomes and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided injection of the trochanteric bursa. Rheumatol Int 2018; 38 (03) 393-401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Adler RS, Buly R, Ambrose R, Sculco T. Diagnostic and therapeutic use of sonography-guided iliopsoas peritendinous injections. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185 (04) 940-943
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar