OBJECTIVE: To assess the specificity and sensitivity of MR arthrography of the hip in comparison with arthroscopy for the evaluation of intra-articular loose bodies. DESIGN: Over a 3-year period, 81 consecutive patients underwent a total of 82 hip arthroscopies by a single orthopedic surgeon for intractable hip pain. Of the 82 arthroscopies, 70 had pre-operative MR arthrograms. Of these, 57 were available for retrospective review, after which they were compared with the operative notes of the subsequent arthroscopies. RESULTS: Of 82 arthroscopies 16 (20%) demonstrated intra-articular loose bodies, while, in the study group, nine of 57 had loose bodies (16%). There was a total of seven discordant cases (five false negatives and two false positives). The sensitivity of MR arthrography for detection of intra-articular loose bodies was 44%, while the specificity was 96%. CONCLUSION: While the specificity of MR arthrography for the detection of intra-articular loose bodies was high (96%), the sensitivity was not nearly as good (44%).
OBJECTIVE: To assess the specificity and sensitivity of MR arthrography of the hip in comparison with arthroscopy for the evaluation of intra-articular loose bodies. DESIGN: Over a 3-year period, 81 consecutive patients underwent a total of 82 hip arthroscopies by a single orthopedic surgeon for intractable hip pain. Of the 82 arthroscopies, 70 had pre-operative MR arthrograms. Of these, 57 were available for retrospective review, after which they were compared with the operative notes of the subsequent arthroscopies. RESULTS: Of 82 arthroscopies 16 (20%) demonstrated intra-articular loose bodies, while, in the study group, nine of 57 had loose bodies (16%). There was a total of seven discordant cases (five false negatives and two false positives). The sensitivity of MR arthrography for detection of intra-articular loose bodies was 44%, while the specificity was 96%. CONCLUSION: While the specificity of MR arthrography for the detection of intra-articular loose bodies was high (96%), the sensitivity was not nearly as good (44%).
Authors: Glen A Toomayan; W Russell Holman; Nancy M Major; Shannon M Kozlowicz; T Parker Vail Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 3.959