Literature DB >> 15930541

Accuracy of office-based ultrasonography of the shoulder for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears.

Joseph P Iannotti1, James Ciccone, Daniel D Buss, Jeffrey L Visotsky, Edward Mascha, Kathy Cotman, Nandkumar M Rawool.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This prospective multi-institutional study was designed to define the accuracy of ultrasonography, when performed in an orthopaedic surgeon's office, for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears.
METHODS: An anatomic diagnosis and a treatment plan were made on the basis of office-based shoulder ultrasonography, physical examination, and radiographs for ninety-eight patients (ninety-nine shoulders) with a clinical diagnosis of a rotator-cuff-related problem. The results of the ultrasonographic studies were then compared with the results of magnetic resonance imaging and the operative findings.
RESULTS: Office-based ultrasonography led to the correct diagnosis for thirty-seven (88%) of forty-two shoulders with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear or both full and partial-thickness tears, twenty-six (70%) of thirty-seven shoulders with a partial-thickness rotator cuff tear only, and sixteen (80%) of twenty shoulders with normal tendons. In no case was the surgical approach (open or arthroscopic) that had been planned on the basis of the ultrasonography altered by the operative findings, but the operative finding of a full-thickness tear resulted in an arthroscopic cuff repair in four shoulders. Magnetic resonance imaging led to the correct diagnosis for forty (95%) of forty-two shoulders with a full-thickness rotator cuff tear or both full and partial-thickness rotator cuff tears, twenty-seven (73%) of thirty-seven shoulders with only a partial-thickness tear, and fifteen (75%) of twenty shoulders with normal tendons. There were no significant differences between magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography with regard to the correct identification of a full-thickness tear or its size. The sensitivity of ultrasonography for detecting tear size in the anterior-posterior dimension was 86% (95% confidence interval, 71% to 95%), and that of magnetic resonance imaging was 93% (95% confidence interval, 81% to 99%) (p = 0.26). The sensitivity of ultrasonography for detecting tear size in the medial-lateral dimension was 83% (95% confidence interval, 69% to 93%), and that of magnetic resonance imaging was 88% (95% confidence interval, 74% to 96%) (p = 0.41).
CONCLUSIONS: A well-trained office staff and an experienced orthopaedic surgeon can effectively utilize ultrasonography, in conjunction with clinical examination and a review of shoulder radiographs, to accurately diagnose the extent of rotator cuff tears in patients suspected of having such tears. Errors in diagnosis made on the basis of ultrasonography most often consist of an inability to distinguish between partial and full-thickness tears that are approximately 1 cm in size. In this study, such errors did not significantly affect the planned surgical approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15930541     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02100

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  47 in total

1.  Subscapularis release in shoulder replacement determines structural muscular changes.

Authors:  Lieven Franciscus De Wilde; Tineke De Coninck; Francis De Neve; Bart M Berghs
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Learning curve of office-based ultrasonography for rotator cuff tendons tears.

Authors:  Ji-Hoon Ok; Yang-Soo Kim; Jung-Man Kim; Tae-Wook Yoo
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Isolated rupture of teres major in a goalkeeper.

Authors:  Rafael Almeida Maciel; Rodrigo Kallas Zogaib; Alberto De Castro Pochini; Benno Ejnisman
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2015-12-23

4.  Surgeon-operated ultrasonography in a one-stop shoulder clinic.

Authors:  R Seagger; T Bunker; P Hamer
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.891

5.  Supraspinatus tendon tears: comparison of 3D US and MR arthrography with surgical correlation.

Authors:  Chang Ho Kang; Sam Soo Kim; Jung Hyuk Kim; Kyoo Byung Chung; Yun Hwan Kim; Yu-Whan Oh; Woong-Kyo Jeong; Baek Hyun Kim
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-06-20       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 6.  [Imaging in evaluating rotator cuff tears].

Authors:  A Hedtmann; G Heers
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  Classification of rotator cuff tendinopathy using high definition ultrasound.

Authors:  Hannah Hinsley; Alex Nicholls; Michael Daines; Gemma Wallace; Nigel Arden; Andrew Carr
Journal:  Muscles Ligaments Tendons J       Date:  2014-11-17

8.  Open repair of isolated traumatic subscapularis tendon tears with a synthetic soft tissue reinforcement.

Authors:  D Petriccioli; C Bertone; G Marchi; I Mujahed
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2013-04-16

9.  Shoulder kinetics and ultrasonography changes after performing a high-intensity task in spinal cord injury subjects and healthy controls.

Authors:  A Gil-Agudo; M S Mozos; B Crespo-Ruiz; A J del-Ama; E Pérez-Rizo; A Segura-Fragoso; F Jiménez-Díaz
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 2.772

10.  Detection of partial-thickness supraspinatus tendon tears: is a single direct MR arthrography series in ABER position as accurate as conventional MR arthrography?

Authors:  Saskia A Schreinemachers; Victor P M van der Hulst; W Jaap Willems; Shandra Bipat; Henk-Jan van der Woude
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-03-18       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.