DOCSLIB.ORG

Timing of Arthrocentesis in the Management of Temporomandibular Disorders: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Timing of Arthrocentesis in the Management of Temporomandibular Disorders: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 August 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0155.v1 Timing of Arthrocentesis in the Management of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Dion Tik Shun LI 1, Natalie Sui Miu WONG 1, Samantha Ka Yan LI2, Colman Patrick MCGRATH3, Yiu Yan LEUNG 1 1 Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 2Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 3Applied Oral Sciences & Community Dental Care, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Corresponding author Dr. Yiu Yan Leung Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 34 Hospital Road, Hong Kong Tel: +852 28590511 Fax: +852 28575570 E-mail: [email protected] Funding: None Key words: temporomandibular joint disorders, arthrocentesis, TMJ, arthralgia, lavage 1 © 2020 by the author(s). Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY license. Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 August 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0155.v1 ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to assess the best timing to perform arthrocentesis in the management of temporomandibular disorders with regards to conservative treatment. A systematic search based on PRISMA guidelines, including a computer search with specific keywords, reference list search, and manual search was done. Relevant articles were selected after 3 search rounds for final review based on 6 predefined inclusion criteria, followed by a round of critical appraisal. Eleven publications, including 5 randomized controlled trials and 6 prospective clinical studies informed this review. The studies were divided into 3 groups based on the timing of arthrocentesis: 1). Arthrocentesis as the initial treatment, 2). Early arthrocentesis, and 3). Late arthrocentesis. Meta-analyses compared the efficacy of improvement in mouth opening and pain reduction in the 3 groups. The results were statistically significant and favoured early arthrocentesis, followed by late arthrocentesis in terms of both improvements in mouth opening and pain reduction. All 3 groups showed improvement in mouth opening and pain reduction. We conclude that early arthrocentesis may be able to produce the best clinical results, while arthrocentesis before attempting conservative treatment may produce less favourable outcomes. 2 Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 August 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0155.v1 INTRODUCTION Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are a group of common facial pain conditions affecting 3.7-12% of the general population 1, 2, and is 5 times more prevalent in women 2. TMDs can be from the joint itself, the muscles of mastication, or a combination of both 3. Although up to two-thirds of these patients will seek treatment for TMDs, about 15% of them will develop into chronic disease 1. According to the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial research, the estimated annual cost incurred in the United States related to TMDs is about $4 billion 1. Because of their high prevalence, tendency to develop into chronicity, and significant financial burden to the society, TMDs are no doubt a public health problem. The conventional approach to the management of most types of TMDs begins with conservative treatment, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), physiotherapy, soft diet, and occlusal splint etc. 4. Positive results are seen in between 75-90% of the patients with TMDs with conservative treatment 5. However, there remains a small proportion of patients that are refractory to conservative treatment. In general, as the duration of pain symptoms increase, patient response to intervention diminishes 6, 7, and they become difficult to treat. This phenomenon applies to TMDs as it has been concluded that patients with chronic temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain respond less favourably than in patients where the pain is non-chronic in nature 8-10. Temporomandibular joint arthrocentesis was introduced as a minimally invasive treatment for severe, limited mouth opening in the early 1990s 11. It involves lavage of the superior joint space using 2 needles with an irrigation fluid such as normal saline, 3 Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 August 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0155.v1 with or without additional medications injected into the joint. While arthrocentesis has been proposed to be a first-line treatment for closed-lock of the TMJ 12, different authors have also noted the effectiveness in the treatment of non-locking joints, and mechanisms have been proposed, such as removal of pathological joint fluid, and elimination of the negative pressure termed “the suction cup” effect 8, 13, 14. Being cost-effective and safe, with a success rate of over 80% 15, arthrocentesis is now a standard procedure not only for closed lock of the TMJ, but also for TMJ arthralgia of a non-locking nature when the outcomes of conservative treatment are unsatisfactory. However, how long should conservative treatment be attempted before moving on to the next step in the treatment algorithm when results are unsatisfactory remains a question to be answered. Unfortunately, some patients are shunted between conservative treatment options for an extended period of time without observable progress, while early minimally invasive treatment, such as arthrocentesis, may have the potential to provide timely symptomatic relief as well as functional improvement. This early clinical benefit may prevent the development of chronic pain and psychological deterioration in some of the patients with TMDs. As said earlier, the difficulty of treating pain symptoms increases with the duration of those pain symptoms experienced by the patients. Therefore, the importance of understanding when to performing TMJ arthrocentesis cannot be overstated. However, there is no consensus in the literature regarding the timing of arthrocentesis with regards to conservative treatment at present. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether timing of arthrocentesis, with regards to conservative management, has any effects on the treatment outcomes in patients with temporomandibular disorders. 4 Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 August 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0155.v1 METHODS Eligibility criteria The following PICOTS criteria were applied: ‘P’ (population): adult human patients with pain due to arthrogenic, with or without myogenic TMDs. A clear clinical diagnosis or specific signs and symptoms of TMDs should be mentioned. ‘I’ (intervention): arthrocentesis, or lysis and lavage, with or without intra-articular injections, either as initial treatment (no prior treatment for TMDs), or as treatment after failure of conservative treatment. ‘C’ (comparisons): control or conservative treatment only including occlusal splint, or compared to arthrocentesis with intra-articular injections, or compared to arthrocentesis with different intra-articular injections, or compared to arthrocentesis on patients with different diagnoses of TMDs ‘O’ (outcomes): the primary outcome is pain intensity, measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) or numerical rating scale (NRS). The secondary outcome is maximum mouth opening in millimetres. ‘T’ (time): all studies should have a follow up period of at least 2 weeks. For those studies with arthrocentesis as treatment after failure of conservative treatment, the duration of conservative treatment should be mentioned. ‘S’ (study design): randomized controlled trial or controlled clinical trial or prospective clinical trial. The following studies were excluded: studies not in English, full text not available, animal or cadaver studies, studies not related to TMDs or where there is no mention of specific 5 Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 6 August 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0155.v1 diagnoses or signs and symptoms, studies not using arthrocentesis as intervention, studies that included less than 30 patients undergoing arthrocentesis, studies not using pain and jaw function as outcomes, non-clinical studies, retrospective studies, technical notes, case reports and case series. Information sources and search strategy This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA statement 16. In the first round, a comprehensive electronic search in Pubmed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE (Ovid) and Scopus was updated to March 19, 2020. The following search terms were used: (“Temporomandibular Joint” OR “Temporomandibular Joint Disorders” OR “Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction Syndrome” OR “Myofascial Pain Syndromes” OR “Craniomandibular Disorders” OR TMJ OR TMD or CMD) AND (Arthrocentesis OR “Temporomandibular Joint Arthrocentesis” OR lysis OR lavage). No restrictions on publication date, language, or status of publication were imposed. The abstracts of the articles from the computer search were reviewed for eligibility. Full texts of potentially eligible studies relevant to the treatment of TMDs by arthrocentesis were obtained and included in the second round. In the second round, manual search was performed in 3 relevant international journals: International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and the Journal of Craniomaxillofacial Surgery. In addition, reference lists of all included studies from the first round and from the manual search were searched for relevant articles relating to management of TMDs with arthrocentesis.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arthroscopic Lavage
    Arthroscopic Lavage Arthroscopic lavage is a procedure to wash out any blood, fluid or loose pieces from inside the space between joints. It is commonly used to treat osteoarthritis, a form of arthritis that features the breakdown and eventual loss of the cartilage of one or more joints. What does OHIP fund? OHIP funds arthroscopic lavage procedures that are medically necessary. What changes are included in the 2012 Physician Services Agreement and why? Under the new agreement, arthroscopic knee lavage is no longer insured for the treatment of osteoarthritis, because it is an ineffective treatment. This change is based on clinical evidence which shows that this treatment does not improve symptoms and also does not delay surgery if needed. A 2007 best practice guideline from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the United Kingdom states that there is no evidence to support arthroscopic knee lavage as a treatment for osteoarthritis. An evidence-based analysis the OHTAC recommended in 2005 against the use of arthroscopic lavage for osteoarthritis of the knee. OHTAC’s recommendations are as follows: o Arthroscopic debridement, a surgical procedure to remove damaged tissue in joints using a "scope", of the knee has so far only been found to be effective for osteoarthritis of the inner compartment of the knee. All other indications should be reviewed with a view to reducing arthroscopic debridement as an effective therapy. o Arthroscopic lavage of the knee alone (without debridement) is not recommended for any stage of osteoarthritis. This change will reduce unnecessary arthroscopic lavage procedures, saving the cost of the procedure and the time required for both physicians and patients.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 GERIATRIC ORTHOPEDICS Susan Day, MD* by the Year 2020 About 20% of the Population, Or an Estimated 60 Million People, Will Be Aged 65 Years Or Over
    11 GERIATRIC ORTHOPEDICS Susan Day, MD* By the year 2020 about 20% of the population, or an estimated 60 million people, will be aged 65 years or over. Increasing age leads to increasing vulnerability in the musculo- skeletal system through injury and disease. Approximately 80% of those older persons will have musculoskeletal complaints. Significant osteoarthritis of the hip or knee will be reported by 40% to 60% of older persons. Disabling osteoarthritis of the weight-bearing joints commonly leads to joint replacement surgery, which was performed an average of 648,000 times annually from 1993 to 1995. 1 In 1996, 74% of the total knee replacements and 68% of the total hip replacements were performed on patients aged 65 and older. 1 As the number of elders in the population increases, so will the need for joint replacement surgery. Joint arthroplasty is expected to increase by at least 80% by 2030. 1 Age-related changes in bone and soft tissue are commonly associated with disabling fractures. In the first 5 years following menopause, women lose up to 25% of their bone mass. In the United States, osteoporosis affects approximately 20 million persons, and every year 1.3 million fractures are attributed to this condition. Muscle strength decreases on average by about one third after age 60, which can lead to difficulty maintaining balance and predispose a person to falls. By the age of 90, one third of women and one sixth of men will experience a hip fracture. About two thirds of those who fracture a hip do not return to their prefracture level of functioning.
    [Show full text]
  • Synovial Fluidfluid 11
    LWBK461-c11_p253-262.qxd 11/18/09 6:04 PM Page 253 Aptara Inc CHAPTER SynovialSynovial FluidFluid 11 Key Terms ANTINUCLEAR ANTIBODY ARTHROCENTESIS BULGE TEST CRYSTAL-INDUCED ARTHRITIS GROUND PEPPER HYALURONATE MUCIN OCHRONOTIC SHARDS RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS (RA) RHEUMATOID FACTOR (RF) RICE BODIES ROPE’S TEST SEPTIC ARTHRITIS Learning Objectives SYNOVIAL SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS 1. Define synovial. VISCOSITY 2. Describe the formation and function of synovial fluid. 3. Explain the collection and handling of synovial fluid. 4. Describe the appearance of normal and abnormal synovial fluids. 5. Correlate the appearance of synovial fluid with possible cause. 6. Interpret laboratory tests on synovial fluid. 7. Suggest further testing for synovial fluid, based on preliminary results. 8. List the four classes or categories of joint disease. 9. Correlate synovial fluid analyses with their representative disease classification. 253 LWBK461-c11_p253-262.qxd 11/18/09 6:04 PM Page 254 Aptara Inc 254 Graff’s Textbook of Routine Urinalysis and Body Fluids oint fluid is called synovial fluid because of its resem- blance to egg white. It is a viscous, mucinous substance Jthat lubricates most joints. Analysis of synovial fluid is important in the diagnosis of joint disease. Aspiration of joint fluid is indicated for any patient with a joint effusion or inflamed joints. Aspiration of asymptomatic joints is beneficial for patients with gout and pseudogout as these fluids may still contain crystals.1 Evaluation of physical, chemical, and microscopic characteristics of synovial fluid comprise routine analysis. This chapter includes an overview of the composition and function of synovial fluid, and laboratory procedures and their interpretations.
    [Show full text]
  • ICD~10~PCS Complete Code Set Procedural Coding System Sample
    ICD~10~PCS Complete Code Set Procedural Coding System Sample Table.of.Contents Preface....................................................................................00 Mouth and Throat ............................................................................. 00 Introducton...........................................................................00 Gastrointestinal System .................................................................. 00 Hepatobiliary System and Pancreas ........................................... 00 What is ICD-10-PCS? ........................................................................ 00 Endocrine System ............................................................................. 00 ICD-10-PCS Code Structure ........................................................... 00 Skin and Breast .................................................................................. 00 ICD-10-PCS Design ........................................................................... 00 Subcutaneous Tissue and Fascia ................................................. 00 ICD-10-PCS Additional Characteristics ...................................... 00 Muscles ................................................................................................. 00 ICD-10-PCS Applications ................................................................ 00 Tendons ................................................................................................ 00 Understandng.Root.Operatons..........................................00
    [Show full text]
  • MS Orthopaedics)
    CURRICULUM / STATUTES & REGULATIONS FOR 5 YEARS DEGREE PROGRAMME IN ORTHOPAEDICS (MS Orthopaedics) UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, LAHORE STATUTES Nomenclature Of The Proposed Course The name of degree programme shall be MS Orthopaedics. This name is well recognized and established for the last many decades worldwide. Course Title: MS Orthopaedics Training Centers Departments of Orthopaedics (accredited by UHS) in affiliated institutes of University of Health Sciences Lahore. Duration of Course The duration of MS Orthopaedics course shall be five (5) years with structured training in a recognized department under the guidance of an approved supervisor. After admission in MS Orthopaedics Programme the resident will spend first 6 Months in the relevant Department of Orthopaedics as Induction period during which resident will get orientation about the chosen discipline and will also participate in the mandatory workshops (Appendix E). The research project shall be designed and the synopsis be prepared during this period On completion of Induction period the resident shall start training to learn Basic Principles of General Surgery for 18 Months. During this period the Research Synopsis shall be got approved by the AS&RB of the university. At the end of 2nd Calendar year the candidate shall take up Intermediate Examination. During 3rd, 4th & 5th years, of the Program, there shall be two components of the training. 1) Clinical Training in Orthopaedics 2) Research and Thesis writing The candidate will undergo clinical training in the discipline to achieve the educational objectives (knowledge & Skills) alongwith rotation in the relevant fields during the 4th & 5th years of the programme. The clinical training shall be competency based.
    [Show full text]
  • CPT® Procedural Coding 110 L with Areportoftheprocedure
    20610-20611 2017 Illustrated Coding and Billing Expert for Orthopedics Lower 20610-20611 ICD-9-CM Diagnostic Codes M16.7 Other unilateral secondary 711.05 Pyogenic arthritis involving pelvic osteoarthritis of hip 20610 Arthrocentesis, aspiration and/or region and thigh M17.0 Bilateral primary osteoarthritis of injection, major joint or bursa (eg, 711.06 Pyogenic arthritis involving lower leg knee shoulder, hip, knee, subacromial 713.5 Arthropathy associated with ⇄ M17.11 Unilateral primary osteoarthritis, right bursa); without ultrasound guidance neurological disorders knee 20611 Arthrocentesis, aspiration and/or 714.0 Rheumatoid arthritis ⇄ M17.12 Unilateral primary osteoarthritis, left knee injection, major joint or bursa (eg, 715.15 Osteoarthrosis, localized, primary, pelvic region and thigh M17.2 Bilateral post-traumatic osteoarthritis shoulder, hip, knee, subacromial 715.16 Osteoarthrosis, localized, primary, of knee bursa); with ultrasound guidance, with lower leg M17.5 Other unilateral secondary permanent recording and reporting 715.25 Osteoarthrosis, localized, secondary, osteoarthritis of knee (Do not report 20610, 20611 in pelvic region and thigh ⇄ M1A.051 Idiopathic chronic gout, right hip conjunction with 27370, 76942) 715.26 Osteoarthrosis, localized, secondary, ⇄ M1A.062 Idiopathic chronic gout, left knee (If fluoroscopic, CT, or MRI guidance is lower leg ⇄ M25.052 Hemarthrosis, left hip ⇄ M25.061 Hemarthrosis, right knee performed, see 77002, 77012, 77021) 715.35 Osteoarthrosis, localized, not specified whether primary
    [Show full text]
  • Arthroscopic Knee Washout, with Or Without Debridement, for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis
    IP 366 NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE INTERVENTIONAL PROCEDURES PROGRAMME Interventional procedure overview of arthroscopic knee washout, with or without debridement, for the treatment of osteoarthritis Osteoarthritis of the knee can cause pain, stiffness, swelling and difficulty in walking. An arthroscopic knee washout involves flushing the joint with fluid, which is introduced through small incisions in the knee. The procedure is often done with debridement, which is the removal of debris around the joint. Introduction This overview has been prepared to assist members of the Interventional Procedures Advisory Committee (IPAC) in making recommendations about the safety and efficacy of an interventional procedure. It is based on a rapid review of the medical literature and specialist opinion. It should not be regarded as a definitive assessment of the procedure. Date prepared This overview was prepared in September 2006. Procedure name • Arthroscopic knee washout (lavage) with or without debridement Specialty societies • British Orthopaedic Association • British Association for Surgery of the Knee Description Indications Arthroscopic washout is used to treat osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis of the knee is the result of progressive degeneration of the cartilage of the joint surface. IP Overview: arthroscopic knee washout Page 1 of 23 IP 366 Current treatment and alternatives Treatment options depend on the severity of the osteoarthritis. The condition is usually chronic, and patients may have several treatment strategies applied at different stages. Conservative treatments include medications to relieve pain and inflammation, and physiotherapy / prescribed exercise. If there is a knee-joint effusion, fluid around the knee may be aspirated with a needle (arthrocentesis) to reduce pain and swelling.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthroscopic Lavage and Debridement for Osteoarthritis of the Knee
    Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series 2005; Vol. 5, No. 12 Arthroscopic Lavage and Debridement for Osteoarthritis of the Knee An Evidence-Based Analysis September 2005 Medical Advisory Secretariat Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Suggested Citation This report should be cited as follows: Medical Advisory Secretariat. Arthroscopic lavage and debridement for osteoarthritis of the knee: an evidence-based analysis. Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series 2005; 5(12) Permission Requests All inquiries regarding permission to reproduce any content in the Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series should be directed to [email protected] How to Obtain Issues in the Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series All reports in the Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series are freely available in PDF format at the following URL: www.health.gov.on.ca/ohtas Print copies can be obtained by contacting [email protected] Conflict of Interest Statement All analyses in the Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series are impartial and subject to a systematic evidence-based assessment process. There are no competing interests or conflicts of interest to declare. Peer Review All Medical Advisory Secretariat analyses are subject to external expert peer review. Additionally, the public consultation process is also available to individuals wishing to comment on an analysis prior to finalization. For more information, please visit http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/providers/program/ohtac/public_engage_overview.html Contact Information The Medical Advisory Secretariat Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care 20 Dundas Street West, 10th floor Toronto, Ontario CANADA M5G 2N6 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 416-314-1092 ISSN 1915-7398 (Online) ISBN 1-4249-0122-7 (PDF) 2 Arthroscopic Lavage and Debridement - Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series 2005; Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Synovectomy with 166Ho-Ferric Hydroxide: a First Experience
    Radiation Synovectomy with 166Ho-Ferric Hydroxide: A First Experience Sedat Ofluoglu, MD1; Eva Schwameis, MD2; Harald Zehetgruber, MD2; Ernst Havlik, PhD3; Axel Wanivenhaus, MD2; Ingrid Schweeger, MD1; Konrad Weiss, MD4; Helmut Sinzinger, MD1; and Christian Pirich, MD1 1Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 2Department of Orthopedics, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 3Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics and Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Nuclear Medicine, Vienna, Austria; and 4Department of Nuclear Medicine, General Hospital of Wiener Neustadt, Wiener Neustadt, Austria lage, leading to the progressive loss of joint function and Radiation synovectomy (RS) is indicated when conventional significant disability. Treatment of chronic synovitis using pharmacologic treatment of chronic synovitis has not relieved radiation synovectomy (RS) aims to stop the inflammatory its symptoms. The use of radionuclides that are bound to ferric process causing pain, disability, and nonreversible structural hydroxide (FH) particles has been shown to be effective and damage to the joint (1–3). RS has been in clinical use for 166 safe for this procedure. Ho-FH macroaggregates offer prom- 50y(4) primarily as an alternative to surgical treatment (5). ising properties for RS but there is a lack of clinical data. We Safety is one of the most important aspects when radionu- investigated the efficacy and safety of 166Ho-FH in a prospective clinical trial in patients suffering from chronic synovitis. Meth- clides are applied therapeutically. The use of ferric hydrox- ods: Twenty-four intraarticular injections were performed in 22 ide (FH) particles as a carrier may offer some advantages patients receiving a mean activity of 1.11 GBq (range, 0.77–1.24 over other carriers with respect to the frequency and degree GBq) 166Ho-FH.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 1 2 Ten Things Physicians and Patients Should Question
    American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Ten Things Physicians and Patients Should Question Avoid performing routine post-operative deep vein thrombosis ultrasonography screening in patients who undergo elective hip 1 or knee arthroplasty. Since ultrasound is not effective at diagnosing unsuspected deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and appropriate alternative screening tests do not exist, if there is no change in the patient’s clinical status, routine post-operative screening for DVT after hip or knee arthroplasty does not change outcomes or clinical management. Don’t use needle lavage to treat patients with symptomatic 2 osteoarthritis of the knee for long-term relief. The use of needle lavage in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee does not lead to measurable improvements in pain, function, 50-foot walking time, stiffness, tenderness or swelling. Don’t use glucosamine and chondroitin to treat patients with 3 symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee. Both glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate do not provide relief for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee. Don’t use lateral wedge insoles to treat patients with symptomatic medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. 4 In patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee, the use of lateral wedge or neutral insoles does not improve pain or functional outcomes. Comparisons between lateral and neutral heel wedges were investigated, as were comparisons between lateral wedged insoles and lateral wedged insoles with subtalar strapping. The systematic review concludes that there is only limited evidence for the effectiveness of lateral heel wedges and related orthoses. In addition, the possibility exists that those who do not use them may experience fewer symptoms from osteoarthritis of the knee.
    [Show full text]
  • DISSERTATION INVESTIGATION of CATIONIC CONTRAST-ENHANCED COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY for the EVALUATION of EQUINE ARTICULAR CARTILAGE Su
    DISSERTATION INVESTIGATION OF CATIONIC CONTRAST-ENHANCED COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR THE EVALUATION OF EQUINE ARTICULAR CARTILAGE Submitted by Bradley B. Nelson Department of Clinical Sciences In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Fall 2017 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Christopher E. Kawcak Co-Advisor: Laurie R. Goodrich C. Wayne McIlwraith Mark W. Grinstaff Myra F. Barrett Copyright by Bradley Bernard Nelson 2017 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT INVESTIGATION OF CATIONIC CONTRAST-ENHANCED COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY FOR THE EVALUATION OF EQUINE ARTICULAR CARTILAGE Osteoarthritis and articular cartilage injury are substantial problems in horses causing joint pain, lameness and decreased athleticism resonant of the afflictions that occur in humans. This debilitating joint disease causes progressive articular cartilage degeneration and coupled with a poor capacity to heal necessitates that articular cartilage injury is detected early before irreparable damage ensues. The use of diagnostic imaging is critical to identify and characterize articular cartilage injury, though currently available methods are unable to identify these early degenerative changes. Cationic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) uses a cationic contrast media (CA4+) to detect the early molecular changes that occur in the extracellular matrix. Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) within the extracellular matrix are important for the providing the compressive stiffness of articular cartilage and their degradation is an early event in the development of osteoarthritis. Cationic CECT imaging capitalizes on the electrostatic attraction between CA4+ and GAGs; exposing the proportional relationship between the amount of GAGs present within and the amount of CA4+ that diffuses into the tissue. The amount of CA4+ that resides in the tissue is then quantified through CECT imaging and estimates tissue integrity through nondestructive assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • First, Do No Harm: Calculating Health Care Waste in Washington State
    First, Do No Harm Calculating Health Care Waste in Washington State December 2018 Acknowledgements This report has been prepared by the Washington Health Alliance and is associated with the Choosing Wisely® initiative in Washington state, an effort co-sponsored by the Washington Health Alliance, the Washington State Medical Association and the Washington State Hospital Association since 2015. The organizations currently represented on the Washington State Choosing Wisely Task Force are listed in Appendix D. For more information about this report or the Washington Health Alliance: Contact: Susie Dade at the Washington Health Alliance [email protected] or Nancy Giunto [email protected] We would like to acknowledge that much of the language used in this report to describe specific measures in the Health Waste Calculator is sourced from the “MedInsight Health Waste Calculator Clinical Guides” (Rev: February 2018). We appreciate the detail and thoughtful consideration offered by this resource and are grateful that the Alliance was able to incorporate it into this report. For more information about the Milliman Health Waste Calculator TM : Contact: Marcos Dachary at Milliman: [email protected] Disclaimer: The results included in this report were generated using the Milliman MedInsight Health Waste Calculator (Calculator) and the All Payer Claims Database of the Washington Health Alliance. The Washington Health Alliance and Milliman make no warranties with regard to the accuracy of the Calculator Intellectual Property or the results generated through the use of the Calculator and Alliance data. Neither Milliman nor the Alliance will be held liable for any damages of any kind resulting in any way from the use of results included in this report.
    [Show full text]