Comparison of needle and conventional arthroscopy for visualisation of predefined anatomical structures of the knee joint: a feasibility study in human cadavers and patients.
Arthroscope
Chip-on-tip image sensor technology
Diagnostic arthroscopy
Feasibility study
Knee joint
Needle arthroscopy
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Mar 2024
12 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
13
09
2023
accepted:
08
03
2024
medline:
13
3
2024
pubmed:
13
3
2024
entrez:
13
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In terms of the optics used for Knee arthroscopy, a large number of different endoscopes are currently available. However, the use of the 30° optics in knee arthroscopy has been established as the standard procedure for many years. As early as the 1990s, needle arthroscopy was occasionally used as a diagnostic tool. In addition to the development of conventional optics technology in terms of camera and resolution, needle arthroscopes are now available with chip-on-tip image sensor technology. To date, no study has compared the performance of this kind of needle arthroscopy versus standard arthroscopy in the clinical setting in terms of the visibility of anatomical landmarks. In this monocentric prospective feasibility study, our aim was to evaluate predefined anatomical landmarks of the knee joint using needle arthroscopy (0° optics) and conventional knee arthroscopy (30° optics) and compare their performance during knee surgery. Examinations were performed on eight cadavers and seven patients who required elective knee arthroscopy. Two surgeons independently performed the examinations on these 15 knee joints, so that we were able to compare a total of 30 examinations. The focus was on the anatomical landmarks that could be visualized during a conventional diagnostic knee arthroscopy procedure. The quality of visibility was evaluated using a questionnaire. In summary, the average visibility for all the anatomic landmarks was rated 4.98/ 5 for the arthroscopy using 30° optics. For needle arthroscopy, an average score of 4.89/ 5 was obtained. Comparatively, the needle arthroscope showed slightly limited visibility of the retropatellar gliding surface in eight (4.5/ 5 vs. 5/ 5), medial rim of the patella in four (4.85/ 5 vs. 5/ 5), and suprapatellar recess in four (4.83/ 5 vs. 5/ 5) cases. Needle arthroscopy was slightly better at visualizing the posterior horn of the medial meniscus in four knee joints (4.9/ 5 vs. 4.85/ 5). Needle arthroscopy is a promising technology with advantages in terms of minimally invasive access and good visibility of anatomical landmarks. However, it also highlights some limitations, particularly in cases with challenging anatomy or the need for a wide field of view.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In terms of the optics used for Knee arthroscopy, a large number of different endoscopes are currently available. However, the use of the 30° optics in knee arthroscopy has been established as the standard procedure for many years. As early as the 1990s, needle arthroscopy was occasionally used as a diagnostic tool. In addition to the development of conventional optics technology in terms of camera and resolution, needle arthroscopes are now available with chip-on-tip image sensor technology. To date, no study has compared the performance of this kind of needle arthroscopy versus standard arthroscopy in the clinical setting in terms of the visibility of anatomical landmarks. In this monocentric prospective feasibility study, our aim was to evaluate predefined anatomical landmarks of the knee joint using needle arthroscopy (0° optics) and conventional knee arthroscopy (30° optics) and compare their performance during knee surgery.
METHODS
METHODS
Examinations were performed on eight cadavers and seven patients who required elective knee arthroscopy. Two surgeons independently performed the examinations on these 15 knee joints, so that we were able to compare a total of 30 examinations. The focus was on the anatomical landmarks that could be visualized during a conventional diagnostic knee arthroscopy procedure. The quality of visibility was evaluated using a questionnaire.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In summary, the average visibility for all the anatomic landmarks was rated 4.98/ 5 for the arthroscopy using 30° optics. For needle arthroscopy, an average score of 4.89/ 5 was obtained. Comparatively, the needle arthroscope showed slightly limited visibility of the retropatellar gliding surface in eight (4.5/ 5 vs. 5/ 5), medial rim of the patella in four (4.85/ 5 vs. 5/ 5), and suprapatellar recess in four (4.83/ 5 vs. 5/ 5) cases. Needle arthroscopy was slightly better at visualizing the posterior horn of the medial meniscus in four knee joints (4.9/ 5 vs. 4.85/ 5).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Needle arthroscopy is a promising technology with advantages in terms of minimally invasive access and good visibility of anatomical landmarks. However, it also highlights some limitations, particularly in cases with challenging anatomy or the need for a wide field of view.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38475756
doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07346-9
pii: 10.1186/s12891-024-07346-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
212Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Hinz M, Lutter C, Mueller-Rath R, et al. The German Arthroscopy Registry DART: what has happened after 5 years? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023;31:102–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-022-07152-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s00167-022-07152-7
pubmed: 36153780
Müller-Rath R, Weinhart H, Wasmer G. Die Versorgungslandschaft in der Arthroskopie Arthroskopie. 2019;32:303–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00142-019-0298-y .
doi: 10.1007/s00142-019-0298-y
Statistisches Bundesamt Die 20 häufigsten Operationen insgesamt (OPS5). As of September 26, 2023. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Gesundheit/Krankenhaeuser/Tabellen/drg-operationen-insgesamt.html .
Strobel MJ, Zantop T Arthroskopische Chirurgie Teil 1 Kniegelenk (in 4 Bdn, nicht einzeln erhältlich). Band 1: Allgemeiner Teil - Meniskus / ; Band 2: Knorpel - Synovia-Plica-Osteophyten-etc. / ; Band 3: Vorderes Kreuzband / ; Band 4: VKB-Revision - Hinteres Kreuzband, - HKB-Revision - etc, 2. Aufl.
Baeten D, van den Bosch F, Elewaut D, et al. Needle arthroscopy of the knee with synovial biopsy sampling: technical experience in 150 patients. Clin Rheumatol. 1999;18:434–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100670050134 .
doi: 10.1007/s100670050134
pubmed: 10638766
Reece R, Emery P. Needle arthroscopy. Br J Rheumatol. 1995;34:1102–4. https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/34.12.1102 .
doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/34.12.1102
pubmed: 8608348
Meister K, Harris NL, Indelicato PA, et al. Comparison of an optical catheter office arthroscope with a standard rigid rod-lens arthroscope in the evaluation of the knee. Am J Sports Med. 1996;24:819–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354659602400618 .
doi: 10.1177/036354659602400618
pubmed: 8947405
Patel KA, Hartigan DE, Makovicka JL, et al. Diagnostic Evaluation of the Knee in the Office Setting Using Small-Bore Needle Arthroscopy. Arthrosc Tech. 2018;7:e17–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2017.08.044 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2017.08.044
pubmed: 29379709
Lavender C, Patel T, Adil S, et al. Incisionless Knee Synovectomy and Biopsy With Needle Arthroscope and Autologous Tissue Collector. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9:e1259–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2020.05.002 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2020.05.002
pubmed: 33024664
pmcid: 7528214
Lavender C, Lycans D, Kopiec A, et al. Nanoscopic Single-Incision Anterior Labrum Repair. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9:e297–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2019.10.010 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2019.10.010
pubmed: 32226735
pmcid: 7093698
Lavender C, Lycans D, Sina Adil SA, et al. Single-Incision Rotator Cuff Repair With a Needle Arthroscope. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9:e419–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2019.11.012 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2019.11.012
pubmed: 32368459
pmcid: 7188932
McMillan S, Saini S, Alyea E, et al. Office-Based Needle Arthroscopy: A Standardized Diagnostic Approach to the Knee. Arthrosc Tech. 2017;6:e1119–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2017.03.031 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2017.03.031
pubmed: 29354406
pmcid: 5621831
Peters M, Gilmer B, Kassam HF. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Elbow Arthroscopy Using Small-Bore Needle Arthroscopy. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9:e1703–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2020.07.013 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2020.07.013
pubmed: 33294329
pmcid: 7695593
Stornebrink T, Altink JN, Appelt D, et al. Two-millimetre diameter operative arthroscopy of the ankle is safe and effective. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28:3080–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-05889-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-05889-7
pubmed: 32065244
pmcid: 7511271
Amin N, McIntyre L, Carter T, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of needle arthroscopy versus magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and treatment of meniscal tears of the knee. Arthroscopy. 2019;35:554-562.e13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.09.030 .
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.09.030
pubmed: 30712631
Deirmengian CA, Dines JS, Vernace JV et al. Use of a Small-Bore Needle Arthroscope to Diagnose Intra-Articular Knee Pathology: Comparison With Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Am J Orthop. 2018;47. https://doi.org/10.12788/ajo.2018.0007
Gill TJ, Safran M, Mandelbaum B, et al. A prospective, blinded, multicenter clinical trial to compare the efficacy, accuracy, and safety of in-office diagnostic arthroscopy with magnetic resonance imaging and surgical diagnostic Arthroscopy. Arthroscopy. 2018;34:2429–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.03.010 .
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.03.010
pubmed: 29804955
Voigt JD, Mosier M, Huber B. Diagnostic needle arthroscopy and the economics of improved diagnostic accuracy: a cost analysis. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2014;12:523–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-014-0109-6 .
doi: 10.1007/s40258-014-0109-6
pubmed: 25015766
pmcid: 4175434
Zhang K, Crum RJ, Samuelsson K, et al. In-Office Needle Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of Indications and Clinical Utility. Arthroscopy. 2019;35:2709–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2019.03.045 .
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.03.045
pubmed: 31416656
Munn D, Burt J, Gee CW, et al. Moving orthopaedic procedures out of the operating theatre: Outpatient needle arthroscopy can reduce cost & waste, and increase inpatient capacity compared to conventional knee arthroscopy. Knee. 2023;42:143–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2023.03.009 .
doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2023.03.009
pubmed: 37001331
Burt J, Smith V, Gee CW, et al. The role of outpatient needle arthroscopy in the diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal complaints: A systematic review of the Arthrex NanoScope. Knee. 2023;42:246–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2023.04.003 .
doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2023.04.003
pubmed: 37105012
Bundesvereinigung Kassenärztliche. ARTHROSKOPIE VON KNIE UND SCHULTER. INFORMATIONEN ZUR DURCHFÜHRUNG: DOKUMENATION UND FEHLERVERMEIDUNG; 2022. p. 18–21.
Hammer N, Löffler S, Bechmann I, et al. Comparison of modified Thiel embalming and ethanol-glycerin fixation in an anatomy environment: Potentials and limitations of two complementary techniques. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8:74–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1450 .
doi: 10.1002/ase.1450
pubmed: 24706536
Thiel W. Die Konservierung ganzer Leichen in natürlichen Farben. Annals of Anatomy - Anatomischer Anzeiger. 1992;174:185–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0940-9602(11)80346-8 .
doi: 10.1016/S0940-9602(11)80346-8
pubmed: 1503236
Denti M, Arosio A, Trevisan C. Comparison of “catheter” and conventional arthroscopy in the diagnosis of knee derangements. Arthroscopy: J Arthroscopic Related Surg. 1994;10:614–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-8063(05)80057-x .
doi: 10.1016/s0749-8063(05)80057-x
Quinn R, Lang SD, Gilmer BB. Diagnostic Needle Arthroscopy and Partial Medial Meniscectomy Using Small Bore Needle Arthroscopy. Arthrosc Tech. 2020;9:e645–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2020.01.018 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2020.01.018
pubmed: 32489839
pmcid: 7253772
Stornebrink T, Janssen SJ, Kievit AJ, et al. Bacterial arthritis of native joints can be successfully managed with needle arthroscopy. J Exp Orthop. 2021;8:67. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40634-021-00384-5 .
doi: 10.1186/s40634-021-00384-5
pubmed: 34427795
pmcid: 8382939