A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Comparison of two ultrasound-guided injection techniques targeting the sacroiliac joint region in equine cadavers. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objectives: To compare the accuracy and distribution of injectate for cranial (CR) and caudomedial (CM) ultrasound-guided injections of equine sacroiliac joints.

Methods: Both sacroiliac joints from 10 lumbosacropelvic specimens were injected using cranial parasagittal (CR; curved 18 gauge, 25 cm spinal needles) and caudomedial (CM; straight 18 gauge, 15 cm spinal needles) ultrasound-guided approaches. Injectate consisted of 4 ml iodinated contrast and 2 ml methylene blue. Computed tomographical (CT) scans were performed before and after injections. Time for needle guidance and repositioning attempts were recorded. The CT sequences were analysed for accuracy and distribution of contrast.

Results: Intra-articular contrast was detected in sacroiliac joints following 15/40 injections. The CR and CM approaches deposited injectate ≤2 cm from sacroiliac joint margins following 17/20 and 20/20 injections, respectively. Median distance of closest contrast to the sacroiliac joint was 0.4 cm (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.5 cm) for CR approaches and 0.6 cm (IQR: 0.95 cm) for CM approaches. Cranial injections resulted in injectate contacting lumbosacral intertransverse joints 15/20 times. Caudomedial injections were perivascular 16/20 times.

Limitations: Safety and efficacy could not be established.

Clinical Relevance: Cranial and CM ultrasound-guided injections targeting sacroiliac joints were very accurate for periarticular injection, but accuracy was poor for intra-articular injection. Injectate was frequently found in contact with interosseous sacroiliac ligaments, as well as neurovascular and synovial structures in close vicinity of sacroiliac joints.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-16-03-0041DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

sacroiliac joints
16
sacroiliac joint
12
sacroiliac
9
targeting sacroiliac
8
accuracy distribution
8
ultrasound-guided injections
8
gauge spinal
8
spinal needles
8
injections
7
injectate
5

Similar Publications