[The significance of arthrography and arthroscopy in the diagnosis of meniscus injury--a comparative study (author's transl)]

Abstract

The article reports on 364 double-contrast arthrographics and 185 arthroscopies. The results obtained in 126 patients in whom both arthrography and arthroscopy had been conducted, were compared. It became evident that arthrography is of high informative value in the diagnosis of lesions of the meniscus, so that preference may well be given to this method in non-specific knee-joint complaints where meniscopathy is suspected. Arthroscopies are indicated in cases of clinico-arthrographic doubt. Trial arthrotomy for clarifying doubtful meniscus lesions without previous exploitation of all arthrographic/arthroscopic possibilities is no longer justified and should be abandoned. Arthroscopy is definitely superior to arthrography in the diagnosis of, in particular, cartilage structures, of the synovia and of the retropatellar space. It is here where arthrography has its narrow limitations--now and in the future--for methodical reasons.