Search Filters

  • Presentation Format
  • Media Type
  • Diagnosis / Condition
  • Diagnosis Method
  • Patient Populations
  • Treatment / Technique

Can Intra-Articular Gadolinium Confound The Results Of A Diagnostic Anesthetic Injection In Young Patients With Hip Pain?

2021 Congress Paper Abstracts

Can Intra-Articular Gadolinium Confound The Results Of A Diagnostic Anesthetic Injection In Young Patients With Hip Pain?

Daniel Curtis, MD, UNITED STATES William Michael Pullen, MD, UNITED STATES Christopher Jamero, MA, ATC, UNITED STATES Marc R. Safran, MD, Prof., UNITED STATES

Stanford University, Redwood City, CA, UNITED STATES

2021 Congress   Abstract Presentation   5 minutes   Not yet rated


Anatomic Location

Anatomic Structure

Diagnosis / Condition

Treatment / Technique

Diagnosis Method

Sports Medicine

This media is available to ISAKOS 2021: Global Registrants and On Demand purchases only.
Please log in or purchase to access.

Summary: Intra-articular gadolinium for magnetic resonance arthrogram administered concurrently with a diagnostic intra-articular anesthetic injection can result in a false negative response to the diagnostic injection, but is not a negative predictor of short-term surgical outcomes after hip arthroscopy.


Magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) with intra-articular gadolinium and diagnostic intra-articular anesthetic injections (DIAI) are important tools in the evaluation of young patients with hip pathology and are often performed concurrently. However, some authors have questioned whether concurrent gadolinium administration can lead to false negative DIAI due to post-arthrography pain.


Patients receiving a series of two diagnostic intra-articular hip injections with anesthetic, the first with gadolinium for concurrent MRA and the second without gadolinium, were retrospectively identified. Pain response to diagnostic injection, injectate volume, local anesthetic volume, inclusion of corticosteroids, and method of injection were compared between injections. False negative injection was defined as <50% pain relief with concurrent gadolinium, but > or =50% pain relief with subsequent anesthetic injection without gadolinium. False negative injections in patients that ultimately underwent primary hip arthroscopy were identified from this cohort and matched in a 3:1 ratio to a control cohort to compare post-operative single assessment numerical evaluation (SANE) scores.


Forty-three patients underwent a series of anesthetic injections with and without gadolinium and met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pain response was significantly different in injections performed with and without gadolinium (18% vs. 81%; p<0.001). There were significant differences in total injectate volume, local anesthetic volume, corticosteroid use, and method of injection between injections, but these variables were not correlated with pain response based on Spearman's correlation tests. Fifteen patients had false negative responses to injection with gadolinium and were matched in a 3:1 ratio to a control cohort. There was no difference in post-operative SANE scores between the gadolinium-sensitive and control groups (81.6 vs. 80.0, p>0.05) collected at an average one year post-operatively.


Concurrent administration of intra-articular gadolinium with DIAI may result in a false negative response to anesthetic. Additionally, in patients with initial false negative DIAI with gadolinium followed by response to a second injection without gadolinium, short-term post-operative outcomes after hip arthroscopy are similar to a matched cohort.

More ISAKOS 2021: Global Content