Sonography of extraaxial fluid in neurologically normal infants with head circumference greater than or equal to the 95th percentile for age.

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/135166/1/jum2000197443.pd

Benign external hydrocephalus: a review, with emphasis on management

Benign external hydrocephalus in infants, characterized by macrocephaly and typical neuroimaging findings, is considered as a self-limiting condition and is therefore rarely treated. This review concerns all aspects of this condition: etiology, neuroimaging, symptoms and clinical findings, treatment, and outcome, with emphasis on management. The review is based on a systematic search in the Pubmed and Web of Science databases. The search covered various forms of hydrocephalus, extracerebral fluid, and macrocephaly. Studies reporting small children with idiopathic external hydrocephalus were included, mostly focusing on the studies reporting a long-term outcome. A total of 147 studies are included, the majority however with a limited methodological quality. Several theories regarding pathophysiology and various symptoms, signs, and clinical findings underscore the heterogeneity of the condition. Neuroimaging is important in the differentiation between external hydrocephalus and similar conditions. A transient delay of psychomotor development is commonly seen during childhood. A long-term outcome is scarcely reported, and the results are varying. Although most children with external hydrocephalus seem to do well both initially and in the long term, a substantial number of patients show temporary or permanent psychomotor delay. To verify that this truly is a benign condition, we suggest that future research on external hydrocephalus should focus on the long-term effects of surgical treatment as opposed to conservative management

Injection of the subacromial-subdeltoid bursa: blind or ultrasound-guided?

Contains fulltext : 53255.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Blind injection of the subacromial-sub-deltoid bursa (SSB) for diagnostic purposes (Neer test) or therapeutic purposes (corticosteroid therapy) is frequently used. Poor response to previous blind injection or side effects may be due to a misplaced injection. It is assumed that ultrasound (US)-guided injections are more accurate than blind injections. In a randomized study, we compared the accuracy of blind injection to that of US-guided injection into the SSB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 20 consecutive patients with impingement syndrome of the shoulder were randomized for blind or US-guided injection in the SSB. Injection was performed either by an experienced orthopedic surgeon or by an experienced musculoskeletal radiologist. A mixture of 1 m'L methylprednisolone acetate, 4 mL prilocaine hydrochloride and 0.02 mL (0.01 mmol) Gadolinium DTPA was injected. Immediately after injection, a 3D-gradient T1-weighted magnetic resonance scan of the shoulder was performed. The location of the injected fluid was independently assessed by 2 radiologists who were blinded as to the injection technique used. RESULTS: The accuracy of blind and US-guided injection was the same. The fluid was injected into the bursa in all cases. INTERPRETATION: Blind injection into the SSB is as reliable as US-guided injection and could therefore be used in daily routine. US-guided injections may offer a useful alternative in difficult cases, such as with changed anatomy postoperatively or when there is no effective clinical outcome