Arthrography of the glenohumeral joint: experience with a non-ionic dimeric contrast agent and future perspectives

Abstract

The role of conventional arthrography versus computed tomography (CT) arthrography of the glenohumeral joint using iotrolan was evaluated in patients with different shoulder problems. In addition, a diagnostic combination of conventional and CT arthrography was compared with magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography of the glenohumeral joint. Two diagnostic protocols were used. Protocol 1: conventional followed after 30 min by CT arthrography of 37 joints using a double contrast technique with iotrolan 300. Protocol 2: conventional followed after 90–180 min by MR arthrography in 20 patients using a single-contrast technique with 10 ml iotrolan 300 and 1 ml gedopentetate dimeglumine 500 mM. Ten patients also underwent CT arthrography. Neither patient group experienced contrast-related complications. Image quality was good for all conventional arthrograms, excellent in 45/47 CT arthrograms and good in 20 MR arthrograms. CT and MR arthrography were diagnostically valuable in many patients. We conclude that glenohumeral joint evaluation should be perfomed first using conventional or CT arthrography. Iotrolan has proven to be highly reliable and safe in these applications. Iotrolan in combination with gadopentetate dimeglumine, permits MR arthrography following completion of the standard examinations if necessary.