Search

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic significance of combined cardiac 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/MRI with T1/T2 mapping in the evaluation of suspected cardiac sarcoidosis. Methods: Patients with suspected cardiac sarcoidosis were prospectively enrolled for cardiac 18F-FDG PET/MRI, including late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and T1/T2 mapping with calculation of extracellular volume (ECV). The final diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis was established using modified JMHW guidelines. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed as a composite of cardiovascular death, ventricular tachyarrhythmia, bradyarrhythmia, cardiac transplantation or heart failure. Statistical analysis included Cox proportional hazard models. Results: Forty-two patients (53 ± 13 years, 67% male) were evaluated, 13 (31%) with a final diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis. Among patients with cardiac sarcoidosis, 100% of patients had at least one abnormality on PET/MRI: FDG uptake in 69%, LGE in 100%, elevated T1 and ECV in 100%, and elevated T2 in 46%. FDG uptake co-localized with LGE in 69% of patients with cardiac sarcoidosis compared to 24% of those without, p = 0.014. Diagnostic specificity for cardiac sarcoidosis was highest for FDG uptake (69%), elevated T2 (79%), and FDG uptake co-localizing with LGE (76%). Diagnostic sensitivity was highest for LGE, elevated T1 and ECV (100%). After median follow-up duration of 634 days, 13 patients experienced MACE. All patients who experienced MACE had LGE, elevated T1 and elevated ECV. FDG uptake (HR 14.7, p = 0.002), elevated T2 (HR 9.0, p = 0.002) and native T1 (HR 1.1 per 10 ms increase, p = 0.044) were significant predictors of MACE even after adjusting for left ventricular ejection fraction and immune suppression treatment. The presence of FDG uptake co-localizing with LGE had the highest diagnostic performance overall (AUC 0.73) and was the best predictor of MACE based on model goodness of fit (HR 14.9, p = 0.001). Conclusions: Combined cardiac FDG-PET/MRI with T1/T2 mapping provides complementary diagnostic information and predicts MACE in patients with suspected cardiac sarcoidosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: The most common complications warranting revision consideration in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) include instability and its associated causes: infection, periprosthetic fracture, and glenoid baseplate loosening. Management of complications can be challenging and the nuances of treatment are still being elucidated. The focus of this paper is to review the treatment of the failed RSA and discuss evidence-based recommendations for revision. Recent Findings: The most common complications requiring revision RSA are instability and infection. The causes for instability can be subdivided into three main subcategories: loss of compression, loss of containment, and impingement. Loss of compression is further broken down into 6 subcategories revolving around abnormal prosthesis positioning, undersized prostheses, or intrinsic soft-tissue tension loss leading to instability. Periprosthetic infection can also lead to instability, yet the most appropriate management for infected RSA remains controversial. Summary: Restoring stability by maximizing deltoid and soft tissue tension while avoiding impingement revolves around three basic methods: (1) lateralizing and/or upsizing the glenosphere to an inferior position on the glenoid, (2) use of a more constrained polyethylene insert, and (3) distalizing the humerus by increasing the polyethylene thickness and/or the thickness of the humeral tray. Management of periprosthetic joint infection can be performed in one-stage, two-stage, or "three-stage" procedures all showing good outcomes with two-stage procedures being the most commonly performed. However, persistent positive culture with propriobacterium acnes can occur in up to 25% of cases. In order to limit the associated morbidity from failed revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty, continued research on best management of associated complications is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is one of the most common ligamentous injuries suffered by athletes participating in cutting sports. A common misperception is that ACL reconstruction can prevent osteoarthritis (OA). The goal of this paper is to review and discuss the contributing factors for the development of OA following ACL injury. Recent Findings: There has been interesting new research related to ACL reconstruction. As understanding of knee biomechanics following ACL injury and reconstruction has changed over time, many surgeons have changed their surgical techniques to low anterior drilling to position their femoral tunnel in an attempt to place the ACL in a more anatomic position. Even with this change in the femoral tunnel position, 85% of knees following ACL reconstruction have abnormal tibial motion compared to contralateral non-injured knees. Studies have shown increases in inflammatory cytokines in the knee following ACL injury, and newer MRI sequences have allowed for earlier objective detection of degenerative changes to cartilage following injury. Recent studies have shown that injecting IL-1 receptor antagonist and corticosteroids can modulate the post-injury inflammatory cascade. Summary: ACL reconstruction does not prevent the development of OA but can improve knee kinematics and reduce secondary injury to the cartilage and meniscus. Advancements in imaging studies has allowed for earlier detection of degenerative changes in the knee, which has allowed researchers to study how new interventions can alter the course of degenerative change in the knee following ACL injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dual-energy absorptiometry (DXA) is the current reference standard for assessing pediatric osteoporosis; however due to its areal nature, it has limitations. Thus, quantitative ultrasound (QUS), a modality free of ionizing radiation, has been proposed as a potential surrogate for DXA. Objective: To semi-quantitatively assess the diagnostic accuracy of QUS for evaluating pediatric osteoporosis according to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Materials and methods: We retrieved articles on the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative US for assessing abnormal bone quality or quantity in patients of mean age ≤19 years from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library CCTR databases. Evidences were analyzed for reliability, construct and criterion validity, and responsiveness of quantitative US, according to the following questions: (1) How reliable is the acquisition of QUS measurements? (2) Is QUS diagnostically accurate to characterize bone strength and quality in osteoporotic children? (3) Is QUS sensitive to detect changes in bone status over time? (4) Is QUS able to predict future skeletal fractures/degeneration? Three reviewers independently evaluated the quality of reporting and methodological quality using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tools. Results: Out of 262 retrieved references (215 unique), we included 28 studies (1,963 patients; 807 reported boys and 761 girls, others unspecified; reported mean age, 0-19 years). The mean quality of reporting score was 'excellent' in 24/28 (86%) studies; 11/28 (39%) studies had 'adequate' research design quality. Conclusion: There is no evidence of the diagnostic value of QUS at the present time despite the overall excellent and adequate research design quality of primary studies. Although QUS can produce reliable measurements, insufficient evidence has been reported to support other clinimetric properties of this technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]