Comparison of high resolution ultrasonography with clinical findings in patients with ankle pain

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of high resolution ultrasonography for the assessment of painful ankle joint as compared with the clinical findings. Material and Methods: A prospective study was conducted on 136 patients having history of ankle pain and referred to the Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging for ultrasonography. Statistical analysis: Comparison of ultrasonography findings and clinical findings was done using McNemar Test. Results: 136 patients with 218 pathologies of the ankle joint were analyzed. Of these, 178 pathologies were clinically suspected, but 206 were diagnosed with ultrasonography. This difference was statistically significant (p value = 0.000). Conclusion: Ultrasonography is an excellent tool for evaluating patients with ankle pain, especially in cases of lateral ligament pathologies, tendinous pathologies, joint effusion, and miscellaneous pathologies. It can be used as the primary imaging investigation because it allows a rapid, dynamic, and cost-effective examination of the ankle joint. However, ultrasonography has limitations when using it to evaluate a suspected posterior talofibular ligament injury, marrow abnormalities, and deep seated pathologies, for which MRI should be incorporated for a diagnosis. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of high resolution ultrasonography for the assessment of painful ankle joint as compared with the clinical findings. Material and Methods: A prospective study was conducted on 136 patients having history of ankle pain and referred to the Department of Radiodiagnosis and Imaging for ultrasonography. Statistical analysis: Comparison of ultrasonography findings and clinical findings was done using McNemar Test. Results: 136 patients with 218 pathologies of the ankle joint were analyzed. Of these, 178 pathologies were clinically suspected, but 206 were diagnosed with ultrasonography. This difference was statistically significant (p value = 0.000). Conclusion: Ultrasonography is an excellent tool for evaluating patients with ankle pain, especially in cases of lateral ligament pathologies, tendinous pathologies, joint effusion, and miscellaneous pathologies. It can be used as the primary imaging investigation because it allows a rapid, dynamic, and cost-effective examination of the ankle joint. However, ultrasonography has limitations when using it to evaluate a suspected posterior talofibular ligament injury, marrow abnormalities, and deep seated pathologies, for which MRI should be incorporated for a diagnosis.