[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
September 10, 1982

Arthroscopy and Arthrography

JAMA. 1982;248(10):1180-1181. doi:10.1001/jama.1982.03330100020019

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor.—  Dr Mooney, in his editorial "A Few Lessons in Orthopedics" (1982;247:1606), gives a falsely low impression of the value of arthrography. Referring to an article in The Journal concerning anterior cruciate ligament injuries, he cites "numerous false-positive results." Actually, only seven of 19 patients underwent arthrography, and three of the seven received correct diagnoses.Arthroscopy and arthrography are complementary, and arthrography performed by a skilled practitioner can be reliable in 90% to 95% of the cases, as proved in several large series in which 5,000 to 10,000 studies were performed. Our experience in more than 7,000 examinations continues to demonstrate this accuracy, and our data were presented to The Chicago Orthopedic Society in October 1981.Since arthrography has become more popular, we have seen numerous medial meniscus posterior horn tears that were not detected by previous arthroscopy. We believe that arthrography, a proved test of high accuracy