Journals / Okmeydanı Tıp Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 2

Are rosenberg graphics necessery for the diagnosis of ghonarthrosis?

Gonartroz teşhisinde rozenberg grafileri gerekli midir?

Pages
78–81
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Plain radiographs in standing position is enough for radiological evaluation of the joint space for the diagnosis of gonarthrosis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: To determine the effectiveness of Rosenberg graphics in the evaluation of range of joints in patients with gonarthrosis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Among 38 patients who admitted to our clinic because of ghonarhrosis, direct X-ray graphics in standing position and Rosenberg graphics were taken for 76 knees.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Plain radiographs in standing position is enough for radiological evaluation of the joint space for the diagnosis of gonarthrosis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of Rosenberg graphics in the evaluation of range of joints in patients with gonarthrosis. Material and Methods: Among 38 patients who admitted to our clinic because of ghonarhrosis, direct X-ray graphics in standing position and Rosenberg graphics were taken for 76 knees. Imaging of patients with both medial and lateral intervals of the knees were measured on X-ray graphics in standing position and Rosenberg graphics. Results were statistically evaluated with T-test and Mann-Whitney tests for both groups. Results: The mean medial joint space on plain radiographs in standing position and Rosenberg radiographs are measured average 7,76±1,67(4,25-10,88) mm and 7,3±1,41 (4,5-10,06) mm. The lateral joint space width is measured 10,47±7,05 (7,85-14,94) average on plain radiographs in standing position, the average lateral joint space width is measured 10,03±7,77 (6,18-16,82) mm in Rosenberg radiographs. There is no statistically significant difference between measurements of the joint ranges of both imaging methods. Conclusion: Plain radiographs in standing position is enough for radiological evaluation of the joint space for the diagnosis of gonarthrosis.

Özet

Amaç: Gonartrozu olan hastalarda eklem aralığını değerlendirmede Rosenberg grafilerinin etkinliğini belirlemek. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Gonartroz nedeniyle kliniğimiz polikliniğine başvuran 38 hastanın 76 dizinin ayakta basarak direkt grafi ve Rosenberg grafileri çekildi. Her iki görüntüleme yöntemine göre hastaların medial ve lateral eklem aralıkları ölçüldü. Elde edilen sonuçlar T-test ve Mann-Whitney Testleri kullanılarak istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi Bulgular: Ayakta basarak çekilen direkt grafilerde ortalama medial eklem aralığı 7,76±1,67(4,25-10,88) mm Rosenberg grafilerinde ortalama medial eklem aralığı 7,3±1,41 (4,5-10,06) mm olarak ölçülmüştür. Ayakta basarak çekilen direkt grafilerde ortalama lateral eklem aralığı 10,47±7,05 (7,85-14,94) mm, Rosenberg grafilerinde ortalama lateral eklem aralığı 10,03±7,77 (6,18-16,82) mm olarak ölçülmüştür. Her iki görüntüleme yöntemi ile eklem aralıkları ölçümlerinin arasında istatistiksel anlamlı bir fark tespit edilmedi. Sonuç: Gonartroz ön tanısı ile eklem aralığı radyolojik değerlendirme yapılması planlanan hastalarda ayakta basarak çekilen direkt grafi görüntüleme yeterlidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

MALKOÇ, M., OLTULU, İ., KORKMAZ, Ö., ÇİFT, H. T., ŞEKER, A., BÜLBÜL, A. M. (2014). Are rosenberg graphics necessery for the diagnosis of ghonarthrosis?. Okmeydanı Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 2, 78–81. https://ajindex.com/articles/291836

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Felson DT, Naimark A, and Anderson J. The prevalen- ce of knee osteoarthritis in the elderly. The Framing- ham Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis and Rheumatism 1987;30(8):914-918.
  2. Puett DW and Griffin MR. Published trials of nonmedi- cinal and noninvasive therapies for hip and knee osteo- arthritis. Annals of Internal Medicine 1994;121(2):133- 140. http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-121-2-199407150- 00010 3. Davis MA. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis. Clinics in Geriatric Medicine 1988;4(2):241-255
  3. Hammerman D. Clinical implications of osteoart- hritis and ageing. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 1995;54:82-85.
  4. Broughton NS, Ewman JH, Baily RAJ. Unicompart- mental replacement in high tibial osteotomy for osleo- arthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 1986;68B:447
  5. Burks RT. Arlhroscopy and degenerative arthritis of the knee. Arthroscopy 1990;6(1):43.
  6. Insall JN. The Pridie debridement operation for osteo- arthritis of the knee. Clin Orthop 1974;101:61
  7. Macintosh BL, Welsh RP. Joint debridement a comp- liment to high tibial osteotomy in the treatment of degenerative arthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 1977;59A:1094
  8. Taşer Ö, Alturfan AK, Pınar H, Göğüş A. Arthrosco- pic treatment of gonarthrosis. Acta Orthop Traum Turc 1991;25:395-396
  9. Creamer P, Lethbridge-Cejku K, and Hochberg MC. Factors associated with functional impairment in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2000;39(5):490-496.
  10. Ahlback S. Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic in- vestigation. Acta Radiol Supplementum 1968;277:7-72
  11. Markund T, Myrnerts S. Radiographic determination of cartilage height in the knee joint. Acta Orthop Scand 1974;45:752-755.
  12. Resnick D, Vint V. The “tunnel” view in assessment of cartilage loss in osteoarthritis of the knee. Radiology 1980;137:547-548
  13. Rosenberg TO, Paulos LE, Parker RO, Eoward DB, Scon SM. The forty-five degree postercanterior flexi- on weight bearing radiograph of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 1988;70-A:1479-1483
  14. Kettelkamp DB, Jacobs AW. Tibiofemoral contact area: determination and implications. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1972;54-A:349-56
  15. Maquet PG, Van De Berg AJ, Simonet JC. Femorotibial weightbearing areas. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1975;57- A:766-71
  16. Davies AP, Calder D