Literature DB >> 18696062

Comparison of spin echo T1-weighted sequences versus fast spin-echo proton density-weighted sequences for evaluation of meniscal tears at 1.5 T.

Andrew B Wolff1, Lorenzo L Pesce, Jim S Wu, L Ryan Smart, Michael J Medvecky, Andrew H Haims.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: At our institution, fast spin-echo (FSE) proton density (PD) imaging is used to evaluate articular cartilage, while conventional spin-echo (CSE) T1-weighted sequences have been traditionally used to characterize meniscal pathology. We sought to determine if FSE PD-weighted sequences are equivalent to CSE T1-weighted sequences in the detection of meniscal tears, obviating the need to perform both sequences. METHOD AND MATERIALS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of knee arthroscopies performed by two arthroscopy-focused surgeons from an academic medical center over a 2-year period. The preoperative MRI images were interpreted independently by two fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologists who graded the sagittal CSE T1 and FSE PD sequences at different sittings with grades 1-5, where 1 = normal meniscus, 2 = probable normal meniscus, 3 = indeterminate, 4 = probable torn meniscus, and 5 = torn meniscus. Each meniscus was divided into an anterior and posterior half, and these halves were graded separately. Operative findings provided the gold standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to compare the two sequences.
RESULTS: There were 131 tears in 504 meniscal halves. Using ROC analysis, the reader 1 area under curve for FSE PD was significantly better than CSE T1 (0.939 vs. 0.902, >95% confidence). For reader 2, the difference met good criteria for statistical non-inferiority but not superiority (0.913 for FSE PD and 0.908 for CSE T1; >95% non-inferiority for difference at most of -0.027).
CONCLUSION: FSE PD-weighted sequences, using our institutional protocol, are not inferior to CSE T1-weighted sequences for the detection of meniscal tears and may be superior.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18696062     DOI: 10.1007/s00256-008-0561-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Skeletal Radiol        ISSN: 0364-2348            Impact factor:   2.199


  34 in total

1.  Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology.

Authors:  Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Comparison of fast spin-echo versus conventional spin-echo MRI for evaluating meniscal tears.

Authors:  Garyun B Blackmon; Nancy M Major; Clyde A Helms
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Statistical comparison of two ROC-curve estimates obtained from partially-paired datasets.

Authors:  C E Metz; B A Herman; C A Roe
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1998 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  MR imaging of knees having isolated and combined ligament injuries.

Authors:  D A Rubin; J M Kettering; J D Towers; C A Britton
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Potential cost savings of MR imaging obtained before arthroscopy of the knee: evaluation of 50 consecutive patients.

Authors:  L T Bui-Mansfield; R A Youngberg; W Warme; J D Pitcher; P L Nguyen
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Usefulness of turbo spin-echo MR imaging in the evaluation of meniscal tears: comparison with a conventional spin-echo sequence.

Authors:  E M Escobedo; J C Hunter; G C Zink-Brody; A J Wilson; S D Harrison; D J Fisher
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Reliable and computationally efficient maximum-likelihood estimation of "proper" binormal ROC curves.

Authors:  Lorenzo L Pesce; Charles E Metz
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Severity of articular cartilage abnormality in patients with osteoarthritis: evaluation with fast spin-echo MR vs arthroscopy.

Authors:  L S Broderick; D A Turner; D L Renfrew; T J Schnitzer; J P Huff; C Harris
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Meniscal tears missed on MR imaging: relationship to meniscal tear patterns and anterior cruciate ligament tears.

Authors:  A A De Smet; B K Graf
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspected multiple sclerosis. The Rochester-Toronto Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study Group.

Authors:  A I Mushlin; A S Detsky; C E Phelps; P W O'Connor; D K Kido; W Kucharczyk; D W Giang; C Mooney; C M Tansey; W J Hall
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993 Jun 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  2 in total

1.  Evolution of semi-quantitative whole joint assessment of knee OA: MOAKS (MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score).

Authors:  D J Hunter; A Guermazi; G H Lo; A J Grainger; P G Conaghan; R M Boudreau; F W Roemer
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2011-05-23       Impact factor: 6.576

2.  Is the quantitative Diffusion-Weighted MR Imaging and ADC mapping with b-values of 50, 400, and 800 sec/mm(2) a reliable method for evaluation of meniscal tears in the knee?

Authors:  Hasan Aydin; Volkan Kizilgöz; Baki Hekimoğlu
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2011-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.