Retrospective Analysis of the Accuracy of Ultrasound-Guided Magnetic Resonance Arthrogram Injections of the Hip in the Office Setting

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound (US)–guided intra-articular hip injections have been proposed in the literature to be accurate, reliable, and safe alternatives to fluoroscopy-guided injections. PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of US-guided magnetic resonance (MR) arthrogram injections of the hip performed in the office setting by a single orthopaedic surgeon and elucidate the potential effects that patient age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) have on contrast placement. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: From a review of the senior author’s office database, 89 patients (101 hips) who had US-guided MR arthrogram injections performed between December 2014 and June 2016 were identified. Official radiology reports were evaluated to determine whether extra-articular contrast was noted. Patient variables, including BMI, age, and sex, were evaluated between patients who had inappropriately placed contrast and those who did not. RESULTS: Of the 101 hip injections, there were 6 cases that demonstrated inadequate contrast placement within the joint, likely secondary to extravasation or incorrect placement; however, an MR arthrogram was adequately interpreted in all cases. There were no significant differences noted between those with appropriate versus inappropriate contrast placement when evaluating BMI (P = .57), age (P = .33), or sex (P = .67), and neither group had an adverse event. CONCLUSION: US-guided injections are safe and accurate alternatives to fluoroscopy-guided injections in the office setting, with 94% accuracy. Furthermore, BMI, age, and sex did not play a statistically significant role among patients with inappropriately placed contrast.