Literature DB >> 18572130

High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging and conventional magnetic resonance imaging on a standard field-strength magnetic resonance system compared to arthroscopy in patients with suspected meniscal tears.

Stefan Franz Nemec1, Stefan Marlovits, Siegfried Trattnig, Wolfgang Matzek, Marius E Mayerhoefer, Christian Robert Krestan.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the diagnostic performance of high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and conventional MRI of the knee on a standard-field-strength MRI system compared to arthroscopic findings in patients with suspected meniscal tears.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients (20 women, 22 men), referred from the department of trauma surgery, with suspected medial meniscal tears and planned arthroscopy of the knee joint were included in the study. MRI was performed on a 1.0-T MRI scanner with two different protocols: (1) conventional MRI using a circular, polarized knee coil (coil diameter: 17 cm) with a sagittal dual fast spin-echo sequence (repetition time [TR]: 2500 ms; echo time [TE]: first, shortest, second, 120 ms; turbo spin echo [TSE] factor: 12; field of view: 180 mm; matrix: 256 x 512; scan percentage: 100; slice thickness: 3 mm) or (2) high-resolution MRI with a surface dual-loop coil of the medial knee compartment (temporomandibular joint, coil diameter: 8 cm) with a sagittal dual fast spin-echo sequence (TR: 2400 ms; TE: first, shortest; second, 120 ms; TSE factor: 12; field of view: 120 mm; matrix: 512 x 512; slice thickness: 2 mm). The menisci were evaluated on the basis of an adapted score (0 = normal meniscus, 1 = intrameniscal, T2-weighted hyperintense signal, 2 = discontinuity of the surface, 3 = fragmentation). Lesions that received a score of 2 or 3 were graded as meniscal tears. The MRI results were compared to the arthroscopic reports, which represented the gold standard, and the sensitivity of both protocols in detecting a meniscal tear was determined.
RESULTS: Of the 42 patients included in the study, 25 (11 women and 14 men) underwent arthroscopy and all demonstrated a meniscal tear. A meniscal tear was correctly diagnosed in 76% of cases with conventional MRI and in 88% of cases with high-resolution MRI (P = .0087).
CONCLUSION: High-resolution MRI, using a surface dual-loop coil and specific sequences, which can be performed on every standard-field-strength MRI scanner, is able to significantly improve diagnostic performance for the detection of a meniscal tear of the knee joint.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18572130     DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2008.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  5 in total

1.  A new scoring system for prediction of meniscal repair in traumatic meniscal tears.

Authors:  Vinay Kumaraswamy; Arun G Ramaswamy; Shyam Sundar; David V Rajan; Karthik Selvaraj; Santosh Sahanand; S Deebak
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Evaluating bone quality in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Hartmut H Malluche; Daniel S Porter; David Pienkowski
Journal:  Nat Rev Nephrol       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 28.314

3.  Role of low field MRI in detecting knee lesions.

Authors:  Massimiliano Leigheb; Giuseppe Guzzardi; Michela Barini; Michele Abruzzese; Silvia Riva; Alessio Paschè; Francesco Pogliacomi; Lia Rimondini; Alessandro Stecco; Federico Alberto Grassi; Alessandro Carriero
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2018-12-10

4.  Analysis of Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scanners for Evaluation of Knee Pathology Based on Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Christopher S Lee; Shane M Davis; Claire McGroder; William B Stetson; Scott E Powell
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2013-12-05

5.  Assessment of the Usefulness of Image Reconstruction in the Oblique and Double-oblique Sagittal Planes for Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Canine Cranial Cruciate Ligament.

Authors:  Adam Przeworski; Zbigniew Adamiak; Michał Nowicki; Marta Mieszkowska; Angelika Tobolska; Joanna Głodek
Journal:  J Vet Res       Date:  2021-05-16       Impact factor: 1.744

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.