Hepatic osteodystrophy.

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] 17. Radiologe. 2020 Jun;60(6):506-513. doi: 10.1007/s00117-020-00657-7. [Special aspects of stress fractures]. [Article in German] Thierfelder KM(1), Gerhardt JS(2), Langner S(2), Mittlmeier T(3), Weber MA(2). Author information: (1)Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Kinder- und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland. kolja.thierfelder@med.uni-rostock.de. (2)Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Kinder- und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland. (3)Abteilung für Unfall‑, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Chirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland. Comment in Radiologe. 2020 Jun;60(6):475-476. doi: 10.1007/s00117-020-00698-y. BACKGROUND: Stress fractures are very common in clinical practice. They can be classified into fatigue fractures that affect healthy bone and insufficiency fractures in which the bone is already damaged or weakened. IMAGING MODALITIES: Conventional x‑ray images are the standard method in case of a suspected stress fracture. If x‑rays are negative, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be performed, which has a significantly higher sensitivity and can provide further information such as evidence for a pathological fracture. Computed tomography (CT) is suitable for an exact representation of the course of the fracture line and thus for preoperative planning. As a nuclear medicine procedure, bone scintigraphy can be used as bone metabolism in the area of a fracture is increased. KEY IMAGING FINDINGS: Typical x‑ray signs are the gray cortex sign, the periosteal reaction and a fracture line that is often oriented perpendicular to the cortex and which shows a parallel sclerotic line. Later on, callus material becomes evident. MRI reveals periosteal and medullary edema, a reaction in the surrounding soft tissue and a T1-hypointense fracture line. In CT, the fracture line is hypodense and often associated with an adjacent sclerotic area. CONCLUSIONS: For a correct diagnosis, it is important to be familiar with the appropriate imaging modalities and the respective imaging findings of stress fractures. If initial x‑rays are normal and symptoms persist, an MRI should be performed. This is also to rule out other causes such as a pathological fracture. DOI: 10.1007/s00117-020-00657-7