Application of Multidetector CT in Skeletal Trauma

Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has improved our ability to image patients with skeletal trauma. The chief advantages of this technology include the extremely rapid scan times, the ability to produce very-high-quality multiplanar reformations, and the ability to reprocess raw data quickly and easily. Unlike soft tissue imaging, CT of bony structures requires high spatial resolution. Each joint in the body presents a unique challenge, and guidelines for imaging of each of the major joints is discussed throughout this article. In general, use of the thinnest slice width and a bone-reconstruction algorithm maximizes image quality. Imaging of larger joints such as the shoulder and hip requires slightly thicker slices to ensure reasonable image quality, particularly if surface rendering is to be performed. The demonstration of fracture line extension to articular surfaces is a key function of imaging, and image postprocessing is an integral component of high-resolution joint imaging. The introduction of MDCT has enabled submillimeter slice widths, ensuring unparalleled joint visualization in multiple planes from a single scan acquisition.

KEYWORDS

Computed tomography - multidetector - bone - trauma

REFERENCES

• 1 Buckwalter K A, Rydberg J, Kopecky K K, Crow K, Yang E L. Musculoskeletal imaging with multislice CT.  Am J Roentgenol. 2001;  176 979-986
• 2 Hu H, He H D, Foley W D, Fox S H. Four multidetector-row helical CT: image quality and volume coverage speed.  Radiology. 2000;  215 55-62
• 3 Shin J H, Lee H K, Choi C G, Suh D C, Lim T, Kang W. The quality of reconstructed 3D images in multidetector-row helical CT: experimental study involving scan parameters.  Korean J Radiol. 2002;  3(1) 49-56
• 4 Nickoloff E L, Alderson P O. Radiation exposures to patients from CT: reality, public perception, and policy.  Am J Roentgenol. 2001;  177 285-287
• 5 Kuszyk B S, Heath D G, Bliss D F, Fishman E K. Skeletal 3-D CT: advantages of volume rendering over surface rendering.  Skeletal Radiol. 1996;  25 207-214
• 6 Metz V M, Gilula L A. Imaging techniques for distal radius fractures and related injuries.  Orthop Clin North Am. 1993;  24(2) 217-228
• 7 Ring D, Jupiter J B, Herndon J H. Acute fractures of the scaphoid.  J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2000;  8(4) 225-231
• 8 Young J WR. Imaging of pelvic trauma.  J South Orthop Assoc. 1996;  5(1) 63-70
• 9 Kricun M E. Fractures of the pelvis.  Orthop Clin North Am. 1990;  21(3) 573-590
• 10 MacLeod M, Powell J N. Evaluation of pelvic fractures. Clinical and radiologic.  Orthop Clin North Am. 1997;  28(3) 299-319
• 11 Potok P S, Hopper K D, Umlauf M J. Fractures of the acetabulum: imaging, classification, and understanding.  Radiographics. 1995;  15 7-23
• 12 Brandser E, Marsh J L. Acetabular fractures: easier classification with a systematic approach.  Am J Roentgenol. 1998;  171 1217-1228
• 13 Fairbairn J, Mulligan M E, Murphey M D, Resnik C S. Gas bubbles in the hip joint on CT: an indication of recent dislocation.  Am J Roentgenol. 1995;  164 931-934
• 14 Sirkin M, Sanders R. The treatment of pilon fractures.  Orthop Clin North Am. 2001;  32(1) 91-102
• 15 Wechsler R J, Schweitzer M E, Karasick D, Deely D M, Glaser J B. Helical CT of talar fractures.  Skeletal Radiol. 1997;  26 137-142
• 16 Wechsler R J, Schweitzer M E, Karasick D, Deely D M, Morrison W. Helical CT of calcaneal fractures: technique and imaging features.  Skeletal Radiol. 1998;  27 1-6
• 17 Born C T, Tahernia A D. Imaging of calcaneal fractures.  Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 1997;  14(2) 337-356
• 18 Mulligan M E. Ankle and foot trauma.  Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2000;  4(2) 241-253