SSR white paper: guidelines for utilization and performance of direct MR arthrography

Eric Y. Chang, Jenny T. Bencardino, Cristy N. French, Jan Fritz, Chris J. Hanrahan, Zaid Jibri, Ara Kassarjian, Kambiz Motamedi, Michael D. Ringler, Colin D. Strickland, Christin A. Tiegs-Heiden, Richard E.A. Walker

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Direct magnetic resonance arthrography (dMRA) is often considered the most accurate imaging modality for the evaluation of intra-articular structures, but utilization and performance vary widely without consensus. The purpose of this white paper is to develop consensus recommendations on behalf of the Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) based on published literature and expert opinion. Materials and methods: The Standards and Guidelines Committee of the SSR identified guidelines for utilization and performance of dMRA as an important topic for study and invited all SSR members with expertise and interest to volunteer for the white paper panel. This panel was tasked with determining an outline, reviewing the relevant literature, preparing a written document summarizing the issues and controversies, and providing recommendations. Results: Twelve SSR members with expertise in dMRA formed the ad hoc white paper authorship committee. The published literature on dMRA was reviewed and summarized, focusing on clinical indications, technical considerations, safety, imaging protocols, complications, controversies, and gaps in knowledge. Recommendations for the utilization and performance of dMRA in the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle/foot regions were developed in group consensus. Conclusion: Although direct MR arthrography has been previously used for a wide variety of clinical indications, the authorship panel recommends more selective application of this minimally invasive procedure. At present, direct MR arthrography remains an important procedure in the armamentarium of the musculoskeletal radiologist and is especially valuable when conventional MRI is indeterminant or results are discrepant with clinical evaluation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)209-244
Number of pages36
JournalSkeletal Radiology
Volume53
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2024

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this