OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of FSE-Cube, a three-dimensional isotropic resolution intermediate-weighted fast spin-echo sequence, with a routine magnetic resonance (MR) protocol at 3.0 T for detecting surgically confirmed meniscal tears of the knee joint in a large patient population. METHODS: FSE-Cube was added to a routine MR protocol performed at 3.0 T on 250 patients who underwent subsequent knee arthroscopy. Three radiologists independently used FSE-Cube during one review and the routine MR protocol during a second review to detect medial and lateral meniscal tears. Using arthroscopy as the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of FSE-Cube and the routine MR protocol for detecting meniscal tears were determined for all readers combined. McNemar's tests were used to compare diagnostic performance between FSE-Cube and the routine MR protocol. RESULTS: FSE-Cube and the routine MR protocol had similar sensitivity (95.5%/95.3% respectively, P = 0.94) and similar specificity (69.8%/74.0% respectively, P = 0.10) for detecting 156 medial meniscal tears. FSE-Cube had significantly lower sensitivity than the routine MR protocol (79.4%/85.0% respectively, P < 0.05) but similar specificity (83.9%/82.2% respectively, P = 0.37) for detecting 89 lateral mensical tears. For lateral meniscal tears, FSE-Cube had significantly lower sensitivity (P < 0.05) than the routine MR protocol for detecting 19 root tears but similar sensitivity (P = 0.17-1.00) for detecting all other tear locations and types. CONCLUSION: FSE-Cube had diagnostic performance similar to a routine MR protocol for detecting meniscal tears except for a significantly lower sensitivity for detecting lateral meniscal tears, which was mainly attributed to decreased ability to identify lateral meniscus root tears.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of FSE-Cube, a three-dimensional isotropic resolution intermediate-weighted fast spin-echo sequence, with a routine magnetic resonance (MR) protocol at 3.0 T for detecting surgically confirmed meniscal tears of the knee joint in a large patient population. METHODS: FSE-Cube was added to a routine MR protocol performed at 3.0 T on 250 patients who underwent subsequent knee arthroscopy. Three radiologists independently used FSE-Cube during one review and the routine MR protocol during a second review to detect medial and lateral meniscal tears. Using arthroscopy as the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of FSE-Cube and the routine MR protocol for detecting meniscal tears were determined for all readers combined. McNemar's tests were used to compare diagnostic performance between FSE-Cube and the routine MR protocol. RESULTS: FSE-Cube and the routine MR protocol had similar sensitivity (95.5%/95.3% respectively, P = 0.94) and similar specificity (69.8%/74.0% respectively, P = 0.10) for detecting 156 medial meniscal tears. FSE-Cube had significantly lower sensitivity than the routine MR protocol (79.4%/85.0% respectively, P < 0.05) but similar specificity (83.9%/82.2% respectively, P = 0.37) for detecting 89 lateral mensical tears. For lateral meniscal tears, FSE-Cube had significantly lower sensitivity (P < 0.05) than the routine MR protocol for detecting 19 root tears but similar sensitivity (P = 0.17-1.00) for detecting all other tear locations and types. CONCLUSION: FSE-Cube had diagnostic performance similar to a routine MR protocol for detecting meniscal tears except for a significantly lower sensitivity for detecting lateral meniscal tears, which was mainly attributed to decreased ability to identify lateral meniscus root tears.
Authors: Oliver Ristow; Lynne Steinbach; Gregory Sabo; Roland Krug; Markus Huber; Isabel Rauscher; Ben Ma; Thomas M Link Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-01-10 Impact factor: 5.315
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
Authors: Charles Q Li; Weitian Chen; Jarrett K Rosenberg; Philip J Beatty; Richard Kijowski; Brian A Hargreaves; Reed F Busse; Garry E Gold Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Faysal F Altahawi; Kevin J Blount; Nicholas P Morley; Esther Raithel; Imran M Omar Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2016-10-15 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Osamah M Abdulaal; Louise Rainford; Peter MacMahon; Eoin Kavanagh; Marie Galligan; James Cashman; Allison McGee Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Catherine J Moran; Brian A Hargreaves; Manojkumar Saranathan; Jafi A Lipson; Jennifer Kao; Debra M Ikeda; Bruce L Daniel Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 4.813