PURPOSE: To compare the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of patients undergoing knee arthroscopy for chondral lesions. The hypothesis was that MRI displays low sensitivity in the diagnosis and classification of chondral injuries. METHODS: A total of 83 knees were evaluated. The MRIs were performed using the same machine (GE SIGNA HDX 1.45 T). The MRI results were compared with the arthroscopy findings, and an agreement analysis was performed. Thirty-eight of the 83 MRI exams were evaluated by another radiologist for inter-observer agreement analysis. These analyses were performed using the kappa (κ) coefficient. RESULTS: The highest incidence of chondral injury was in the patella (14.4 %). The κ coefficient was 0.31 for the patellar surface; 0.38 for the trochlea; 0.46 for the medial femoral condyle; 0.51 for the lateral femoral condyle; and 0.19 for the lateral plateau. After dividing the injuries into two groups (ICRS Grades 0-II and Grades III and IV), the following κ coefficients were obtained as follows: 0.49 (patella); 0.53 (trochlea); 0.46 (medial femoral condyle); 0.43 (medial plateau); 0.67 (lateral femoral condyle); and 0.51 (lateral plateau). The MRI sensitivity was 76.4 % (patella), 88.2 % (trochlea), 69.7 % (medial femoral condyle), 85.7 % (medial plateau), 81.8 % (lateral femoral condyle) and 75 % (lateral plateau). Comparing the radiologists' evaluations, the following κ coefficients were obtained as follows: 0.73 (patella); 0.63 (trochlea); 0.84 (medial femoral condyle); 0.72 (medial plateau); 0.77 (lateral femoral condyle); and 0.91 (lateral plateau). CONCLUSION: Compared with arthroscopy, MRI displays moderate sensitivity for detecting and classifying chondral knee injuries. It is an important image method, but we must be careful in the assessment of patients with suspected chondral lesions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: To compare the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of patients undergoing knee arthroscopy for chondral lesions. The hypothesis was that MRI displays low sensitivity in the diagnosis and classification of chondral injuries. METHODS: A total of 83 knees were evaluated. The MRIs were performed using the same machine (GE SIGNA HDX 1.45 T). The MRI results were compared with the arthroscopy findings, and an agreement analysis was performed. Thirty-eight of the 83 MRI exams were evaluated by another radiologist for inter-observer agreement analysis. These analyses were performed using the kappa (κ) coefficient. RESULTS: The highest incidence of chondral injury was in the patella (14.4 %). The κ coefficient was 0.31 for the patellar surface; 0.38 for the trochlea; 0.46 for the medial femoral condyle; 0.51 for the lateral femoral condyle; and 0.19 for the lateral plateau. After dividing the injuries into two groups (ICRS Grades 0-II and Grades III and IV), the following κ coefficients were obtained as follows: 0.49 (patella); 0.53 (trochlea); 0.46 (medial femoral condyle); 0.43 (medial plateau); 0.67 (lateral femoral condyle); and 0.51 (lateral plateau). The MRI sensitivity was 76.4 % (patella), 88.2 % (trochlea), 69.7 % (medial femoral condyle), 85.7 % (medial plateau), 81.8 % (lateral femoral condyle) and 75 % (lateral plateau). Comparing the radiologists' evaluations, the following κ coefficients were obtained as follows: 0.73 (patella); 0.63 (trochlea); 0.84 (medial femoral condyle); 0.72 (medial plateau); 0.77 (lateral femoral condyle); and 0.91 (lateral plateau). CONCLUSION: Compared with arthroscopy, MRI displays moderate sensitivity for detecting and classifying chondral knee injuries. It is an important image method, but we must be careful in the assessment of patients with suspected chondral lesions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Entities:
Keywords:
Arthroscopy; Articular cartilage; Injury; Knee; Magnetic resonance imaging
Authors: B Munk; F Madsen; E Lundorf; H Staunstrup; S A Schmidt; L Bolvig; M B Hellfritzsch; J Jensen Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: S P Oakley; I Portek; Z Szomor; R C Appleyard; P Ghosh; B W Kirkham; G A C Murrell; M N Lassere Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Lars Victor von Engelhardt; Clayton N Kraft; Peter H Pennekamp; Hans Heinz Schild; Alfred Schmitz; Marcus von Falkenhausen Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Lars V von Engelhardt; Marthina Raddatz; Bertil Bouillon; Gunter Spahn; Andreas Dàvid; Patrick Haage; Thomas K Lichtinger Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2010-07-05 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Richard Kijowski; Donna G Blankenbaker; Kirkland W Davis; Kazuhiko Shinki; Lee D Kaplan; Arthur A De Smet Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-01-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Carlos Eduardo Sanches Vaz; Olavo Pires de Camargo; Paulo José de Santana; Antonio Carlos Valezi Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2005-12-12 Impact factor: 2.365
Authors: Marcus Vinicius Danieli; João Paulo Fernandes Guerreiro; Alexandre Oliveira Queiroz; Hamilton da Rosa Pereira; Daniele Cristina Cataneo Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 3.075