Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 1 | Pages 41 - 46
1 Jan 2005
Verhagen RAW Maas M Dijkgraaf MGW Tol JL Krips R van Dijk CN

Our aim in this prospective study was to determine the best diagnostic method for discriminating between patients with and without osteochondral lesions of the talus, with special relevance to the value of MRI compared with the new technique of multidetector helical CT. We compared the diagnostic value of history, physical examination and standard radiography, a 4 cm heel-rise view, helical CT, MRI, and diagnostic arthroscopy for simultaneous detection or exclusion of osteochondral lesions of the talus. A consecutive series of 103 patients (104 ankles) with chronic ankle pain was included in this study. Of these, 29 with 35 osteochondral lesions were identified. Twenty-seven lesions were located in the talus.

Our findings showed that helical CT, MRI and diagnostic arthroscopy were significantly better than history, physical examination and standard radiography for detecting or excluding an osteochondral lesion. Also, MRI and diagnostic arthroscopy performed better than a mortise view with a 4 cm heel-rise. We did not find a statistically significant difference between helical CT and MRI. Diagnostic arthroscopy did not perform better than helical CT and MRI for detecting or excluding an osteochondral lesion.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 82-B, Issue 4 | Pages 574 - 578
1 May 2000
Sakellariou A Sallomi D Janzen DL Munk PL Claridge RJ Kiri VA

We analysed 42 weight-bearing lateral radiographs of the ankle, 20 of which were from patients with a clinical and plain radiological diagnosis of talocalcaneal coalition (TCC) who subsequently had CT. The remainder were from 22 healthy volunteers with no clinical findings suggestive of hindfoot pathology. Four observers, blinded to the CT findings, independently evaluated the radiographs on two separate occasions. With the 95% confidence interval and using the CT findings as the comparison we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for the C-sign, and for other signs known to be associated with TCC. Similarly, we also calculated the interobserver and intraobserver reliability for these signs using the kappa statistic. Our results suggest that the C-sign is highly sensitive and specific for TCC. It is an accurate indicator and significantly more reliable than other previously recognised radiological signs of TCC. Features of the C-sign, however, cannot be relied upon to indicate whether the TCC is fibrous or bony