Literature DB >> 24474166

MRI versus ultrasonography to assess meniscal abnormalities in acute knees.

James L Cook1, Cristi R Cook1, James P Stannard2, Gavin Vaughn3, Nichole Wilson2, Brandon L Roller4, Aaron M Stoker1, Prakash Jayabalan5, Moses Hdeib6, Keiichi Kuroki1.   

Abstract

While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is often considered the "gold standard" diagnostic imaging modality for detection of meniscal abnormalities, it is associated with misdiagnosis in as high as 47% of cases, is costly, and is not readily available to a large number of patients. Ultrasonographic examination of the knee has been reported to be an effective diagnostic tool for this purpose with the potential to overcome many of the shortcomings of MRI. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical usefulness of ultrasonography for diagnosis of meniscal pathology in patients with acute knee pain and compare its diagnostic accuracy to MRI in a clinical setting. With Institutional Review Board approval, patients (n = 71) with acute knee pain were prospectively enrolled with informed consent. Preoperative MRI (1.5 T) was performed on each affected knee using the hospital's standard equipment and protocols and read by faculty radiologists trained in musculoskeletal MRI. Ultrasonographic assessments of each affected knee were performed by one of two faculty members trained in musculoskeletal ultrasonography using a 10 to 14 MHz linear transducer. Arthroscopic evaluation of affected knees was performed by one of three faculty orthopedic surgeons to assess and record all joint pathology, which served as the reference standard for determining presence, type, and severity of meniscal pathology. All evaluators for each diagnostic modality were blinded to all other data. Data were collected and compared by a separate investigator to determine sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), correct classification rate (CCR), likelihood ratios (LR[+] and LR[-]), and odds ratios. Preoperative ultrasonographic assessment of meniscal pathology was associated with Sn = 91.2%, Sp = 84.2%, PPV = 94.5%, NPV = 76.2%, CCR = 89.5%, LR(+) = 5.78, and LR(-) = 0.10. Preoperative MRI assessment of meniscal pathology was associated with Sn = 91.7%, Sp = 66.7%, PPV = 84.6%, NPV = 80.0%, CCR = 81.1%, LR(+) = 2.75, and LR(-) = 0.13. Ultrasonography was two times more likely than MRI to correctly determine presence or absence of meniscal pathology seen arthroscopically in this study. Ultrasonography is a useful tool for diagnosis of meniscal pathology with potential advantages over MRI. Based on these data and available portable equipment, ultrasonography could be considered for use as a point-of-injury diagnostic modality for meniscal injuries. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24474166     DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1367731

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Knee Surg        ISSN: 1538-8506            Impact factor:   2.757


  7 in total

Review 1.  Clinical indications for musculoskeletal ultrasound updated in 2017 by European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR) consensus.

Authors:  Luca Maria Sconfienza; Domenico Albano; Georgina Allen; Alberto Bazzocchi; Bianca Bignotti; Vito Chianca; Fernando Facal de Castro; Elena E Drakonaki; Elena Gallardo; Jan Gielen; Andrea Sabine Klauser; Carlo Martinoli; Giovanni Mauri; Eugene McNally; Carmelo Messina; Rebeca Mirón Mombiela; Davide Orlandi; Athena Plagou; Magdalena Posadzy; Rosa de la Puente; Monique Reijnierse; Federica Rossi; Saulius Rutkauskas; Ziga Snoj; Jelena Vucetic; David Wilson; Alberto Stefano Tagliafico
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Snapping Pes Anserinus and the Diagnostic Utility of Dynamic Ultrasound.

Authors:  Shane A Shapiro; Lorenzo O Hernandez; Daniel P Montero
Journal:  J Clin Imaging Sci       Date:  2017-10-17

3.  Comparing Point-of-care-ultrasound (POCUS) to MRI for the Diagnosis of Medial Compartment Knee Injuries.

Authors:  N Ghosh; D Kruse; M Subeh; S Lahham; J C Fox
Journal:  J Med Ultrasound       Date:  2017-08-17

4.  Point-Of-Care Ultrasonography for Diagnosis of Medial Collateral Ligament Tears in Acute Knee Trauma; a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

Authors:  Omid Ahmadi; Farhad Heydari; Keihan Golshani; Sirous Derakhshan
Journal:  Arch Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2022-06-09

5.  MRI evaluation of meniscal anatomy: which parameters reach the best inter-observer concordance?

Authors:  Dario Grasso; Aroa Gnesutta; Marco Calvi; Marta Duvia; Maria Giovanna Atria; Angelica Celentano; Leonardo Callegari; Eugenio Annibale Genovese
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 6.313

6.  Sonographic soft tissue arthritic changes associated with post-stroke hemiplegic knee pain: utility of musculoskeletal ultrasound in a resource-limited setting.

Authors:  Adeniyi S Aderibigbe; Olushola C Famurewa; Morenikeji A Komolafe; Adeleye D Omisore; Victor A Adetiloye
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2020-01-27

7.  Sonographic evaluation of lateral meniscal extrusion: implementation and validation.

Authors:  Philipp W Winkler; Robert Csapo; Guido Wierer; Caroline Hepperger; Bernhard Heinzle; Andreas B Imhoff; Christian Hoser; Christian Fink
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 3.067

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.