Abstract
Background There is no consensus on the utility of arthrography in the evaluation of wrist injuries. This study evaluates ordering trends of different types of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the wrist and compares rates of surgery following these imaging modalities.
Methods A national claims-based database was used to identify patients who underwent MRI within 90 days of a first-instance diagnosis of wrist injury from 2010 to 2018. The utilization of MRI without intravenous (IV) contrast, MRI with IV contrast, and MRI with arthrogram was investigated. The instances of operative procedures of the wrist within 1 year of MRI study were recorded. Patient demographics, comorbidities, type of operative procedure, and ordering physician specialty were obtained. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the utilization of MRI and subsequent 1-year operative intervention rates as well as association of patient-related factors.
Results Magnetic resonance arthrography use was associated with higher rates of subsequent operative treatment. Surgeons were more likely to order an arthrogram at the time of MRI. Younger patients were more likely to undergo MRI-based advanced imaging.
Conclusion Surgeons may perceive MRA of the wrist to play an important role in operative decision-making following wrist injury.
Level of Evidence This is a Level III, retrospective cohort study.
Keywords
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - arthrography - arthroscopy - wrist
