Literature DB >> 16358132

Accuracy of magnetic resonance in identifying traumatic intraarticular knee lesions.

Carlos Eduardo Sanches Vaz1, Olavo Pires de Camargo, Paulo José de Santana, Antonio Carlos Valezi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee in identifying traumatic intraarticular knee lesions.
METHOD: 300 patients with a clinical diagnosis of traumatic intraarticular knee lesions underwent prearthoscopic magnetic resonance imaging. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, likelihood ratio for a positive test, likelihood ratio for a negative test, and accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging were calculated relative to the findings during arthroscopy in the studied structures of the knee (medial meniscus, lateral meniscus, anterior cruciate ligament, posterior cruciate ligament, and articular cartilage).
RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging produced the following results regarding detection of lesions: medial meniscus: sensitivity 97.5%, specificity 92.9%, positive predictive value 93.9%, positive negative value 97%, likelihood positive ratio 13.7, likelihood negative ratio 0.02, and accuracy 95.3%; lateral meniscus: sensitivity 91.9%, specificity 93.6%, positive predictive value 92.7%, positive negative value 92.9%, likelihood positive ratio 14.3, likelihood negative ratio 0.08, and accuracy 93.6%; anterior cruciate ligament: sensitivity 99.0%, specificity 95.9%, positive predictive value 91.9%, positive negative value 99.5%, likelihood positive ratio 21.5, likelihood negative ratio 0.01, and accuracy 96.6%; posterior cruciate ligament: sensitivity 100%, specificity 99%, positive predictive value 80.0%, positive negative value 100%, likelihood positive ratio 100, likelihood negative ratio 0.01, and accuracy 99.6%; articular cartilage: sensitivity 76.1%, specificity 94.9%, positive predictive value 94.7%, positive negative value 76.9%, likelihood positive ratio 14.9, likelihood negative ratio 0.25, and accuracy 84.6%.
CONCLUSION: Magnetic resonance imaging is a satisfactory diagnostic tool for evaluating meniscal and ligamentous lesions of the knee, but it is unable to clearly identify articular cartilage lesions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16358132     DOI: /S1807-59322005000600003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)        ISSN: 1807-5932            Impact factor:   2.365


  13 in total

1.  MRI of the knee: how do field strength and radiologist's experience influence diagnostic accuracy and interobserver correlation in assessing chondral and meniscal lesions and the integrity of the anterior cruciate ligament?

Authors:  W Krampla; M Roesel; K Svoboda; A Nachbagauer; M Gschwantler; W Hruby
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Inter-observer agreement in the identification of the two bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament using magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  M Montoy; T Euvrard; B Moyen; P Roy; J C Rollier; F Cotton
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2008-06-04       Impact factor: 1.246

3.  Accuracy of routine magnetic resonance imaging in meniscal and ligamentous injuries of the knee: comparison with arthroscopy.

Authors:  Noha H Behairy; Mohsen A Dorgham; Sherif A Khaled
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-05-28       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Comparison of image quality in magnetic resonance imaging of the knee at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla using 32-channel receiver coils.

Authors:  F Schoth; N Kraemer; T Niendorf; C Hohl; R W Gunther; G A Krombach
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-08       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Evaluation of MRI versus arthroscopy in anterior cruciate ligament and meniscal injuries.

Authors:  Amreen Abdul Bari; Shivali Vaibhav Kashikar; Bhushan Narayan Lakhkar; Mohammad Saleem Ahsan
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-12-05

Review 6.  The anterior knee: normal variants, common pathologies, and diagnostic pitfalls on MRI.

Authors:  Yong Wei Liu; Matthew R Skalski; Dakshesh B Patel; Eric A White; Anderanik Tomasian; George R Matcuk
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2018-03-25       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Diagnosis and classification of chondral knee injuries: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy.

Authors:  Marcus Vinicius Danieli; João Paulo Fernandes Guerreiro; Alexandre deOliveira Queiroz; Hamilton daRosa Pereira; Susi Tagima; Marcelo Garcia Marini; Daniele Cristina Cataneo
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-10       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Evaluating posterior cruciate ligament injury by using two-dimensional ultrasonography and sonoelastography.

Authors:  Lin-Yi Wang; Tsung-Hsun Yang; Yu-Chi Huang; Wen-Yi Chou; Chung-Cheng Huang; Ching-Jen Wang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Arthroscopic and low-field MRI (0.25 T) evaluation of meniscus and ligaments of painful knee.

Authors:  Harish S Lokannavar; Xiaochun Yang; Harsha Guduru
Journal:  J Clin Imaging Sci       Date:  2012-05-23

10.  Validation, Intrarater and Interrater Reliability Study of the Lateral-Anterior Drawer Test for Detecting Posterior Cruciate Ligament Ruptures: Study Protocol of a Prospective Controlled Single-Blinded Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Gesine H Seeber; Christoph Thalhamer; Julia Hahne; Omer Matthijs
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.