Marcello Zappia1,2, Alessandro Castagna3, Antonio Barile4, Vito Chianca5, Luca Brunese6, Nicole Pouliart7,8. 1. Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy. marcellozappia1@tin.it. 2. Varelli Institute, Naples, Italy. marcellozappia1@tin.it. 3. Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 4. Applied Clinical Science and Biotechnology, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy. 5. Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University "Federico II", Naples, Italy. 6. Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy. 7. Basic Biomedical Sciences-Human Anatomy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium. 8. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology-Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The coracoglenoid ligament (CGL) forms part of the anterosuperior capsuloligamentous complex of the shoulder. Although it has received attention in the anatomical literature, it has not been investigated on imaging. The purpose of this study is to determine the percentage value and the interobserver agreement of identification and classification of the CGL on MR and MR arthrography (MRA) imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospectively, 280 MR and 150 MRA examinations were evaluated for detection of the CGL by two musculoskeletal radiologists. On the MRA examinations the CGL configuration in relation to the superior glenohumeral (SGHL) and coracohumeral ligament (CHL) was classified into five types. Additionally, the percentage of intra-articular appearance of the CGL and its mean thickness value were calculated. Finally, a possible correlation between pathological condition and anatomical type was evaluated on MRA. RESULTS: The CGL could be identified in 56%/54% of MRI and in 76%/77% of MRA examinations. On MRA, the CGL was detected as distinct structures in 37%/35% of cases and it appeared fused (partially or totally) with the SGHL and/or CHL in 39%/42%; it was absent in 12%/12% and it appears undistinguishable in the remaining cases. The interobserver agreement was excellent (κ = 0.98 for detection on MRI; p = 0.927 for classification of anterosuperior anatomy on MRA; κ = 0.873 and 0.978 for identification on sagittal and axial external rotation MRA respectively; κ = 0.943 for classification as intra- or extra-articular on MRA). CONCLUSIONS: The CGL can be reliably identified on MRI and MRA.
OBJECTIVE: The coracoglenoid ligament (CGL) forms part of the anterosuperior capsuloligamentous complex of the shoulder. Although it has received attention in the anatomical literature, it has not been investigated on imaging. The purpose of this study is to determine the percentage value and the interobserver agreement of identification and classification of the CGL on MR and MR arthrography (MRA) imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospectively, 280 MR and 150 MRA examinations were evaluated for detection of the CGL by two musculoskeletal radiologists. On the MRA examinations the CGL configuration in relation to the superior glenohumeral (SGHL) and coracohumeral ligament (CHL) was classified into five types. Additionally, the percentage of intra-articular appearance of the CGL and its mean thickness value were calculated. Finally, a possible correlation between pathological condition and anatomical type was evaluated on MRA. RESULTS: The CGL could be identified in 56%/54% of MRI and in 76%/77% of MRA examinations. On MRA, the CGL was detected as distinct structures in 37%/35% of cases and it appeared fused (partially or totally) with the SGHL and/or CHL in 39%/42%; it was absent in 12%/12% and it appears undistinguishable in the remaining cases. The interobserver agreement was excellent (κ = 0.98 for detection on MRI; p = 0.927 for classification of anterosuperior anatomy on MRA; κ = 0.873 and 0.978 for identification on sagittal and axial external rotation MRA respectively; κ = 0.943 for classification as intra- or extra-articular on MRA). CONCLUSIONS: The CGL can be reliably identified on MRI and MRA.
Authors: Peter Habermeyer; Petra Magosch; Maria Pritsch; Markus Thomas Scheibel; Sven Lichtenberg Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2004 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Marcello Zappia; Francesco Di Pietto; Alberto Aliprandi; Simona Pozza; Paola De Petro; Alessandro Muda; Luca Maria Sconfienza Journal: Insights Imaging Date: 2016-04-23
Authors: Federico Bruno; Francesco Arrigoni; Silvia Mariani; Alessandra Splendiani; Ernesto Di Cesare; Carlo Masciocchi; Antonio Barile Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-04-04 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Alberto Bellelli; Enzo Silvestri; Antonio Barile; Domenico Albano; Alberto Aliprandi; Roberto Caudana; Vito Chianca; Francesco Di Pietto; Carlo Faletti; Eugenio Genovese; Andrea Giovagnoni; Carlo Masciocchi; Carmelo Messina; Luca Maria Sconfienza; Vincenzo Spina; Marcello Zappia Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-01-28 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Vito Chianca; Domenico Albano; Carmelo Messina; Federico Midiri; Giovanni Mauri; Alberto Aliprandi; Michele Catapano; Lorenzo Carlo Pescatori; Cristian Giuseppe Monaco; Salvatore Gitto; Anna Pisani Mainini; Angelo Corazza; Santi Rapisarda; Grazia Pozzi; Antonio Barile; Carlo Masciocchi; Luca Maria Sconfienza Journal: Acta Biomed Date: 2018-01-19
Authors: Marina Carotti; Vittoria Galeazzi; Francesca Catucci; Marcello Zappia; Francesco Arrigoni; Antonio Barile; Andrea Giovagnoni Journal: Acta Biomed Date: 2018-01-19
Authors: Elisabetta Antonia Nocerino; Davide Cucchi; Paolo Arrigoni; Marco Brioschi; Cristiano Fusi; Eugenio A Genovese; Carmelo Messina; Pietro Randelli; Carlo Masciocchi; Alberto Aliprandi Journal: Acta Biomed Date: 2018-01-19