Bicipitoradial bursitis: MR imaging findings in eight patients and anatomic data from contrast material opacification of bursae followed by routine radiography and MR imaging in cadavers

Citation
Ay. Skaf et al., Bicipitoradial bursitis: MR imaging findings in eight patients and anatomic data from contrast material opacification of bursae followed by routine radiography and MR imaging in cadavers, RADIOLOGY, 212(1), 1999, pp. 111-116
Citations number
12
Categorie Soggetti
Radiology ,Nuclear Medicine & Imaging","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
Journal title
RADIOLOGY
ISSN journal
00338419 → ACNP
Volume
212
Issue
1
Year of publication
1999
Pages
111 - 116
Database
ISI
SICI code
0033-8419(199907)212:1<111:BBMIFI>2.0.ZU;2-9
Abstract
PURPOSE: To use radiography and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging after contr ast material opacification of the bursae in cadaveric specimens to demonstr ate the anatomy of the bicipitoradial bursa and to report MR imaging findin gs in patients with bicipitoradial bursitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bicipitoradial bursa in eight cadaveric elbows were injected with a solution containing gadodiamide, iodinated contrast agent, and gelatin. Radiographs and MR images were obtained in each specimen, with both supination and pronation of the forearm. The morphology and relations hips of the were studied. Anatomic sections subsequently were obtained. MR imaging studies in eight patients with bicipitoradial bursitis were also ev aluated. RESULTS: The bicipitoradial bursa revealed a smooth outline and a wide base along the superficial aspect of the radius. The mean volume of contrast ma terial that could be injected before extravasation was 4 mL. The mean size of the bursa was 1.8 x 2.5 cm. The bicipitoradial bursa enveloped the bicep s tendon, with internal septation seen in two cases. Displacement of the su perficial branch of the radial nerve by the bursa was found in two specimen s. Communication between the bicipitoradial bursa and elbow joint was not o bserved. In patients, MP imaging demonstrated fluid collections in the bici pitoradial bursa in all cases, with compression of branches of the radial n erve in two cases. CONCLUSION: The anatomy of the bicipitoradial bursa is demonstrated with ra diography and MR imaging of bursae. MR imaging allows accurate diagnosis of bicipitoradial bursitis and its effects on adjacent structures.