Nicholas C Nacey1, Michael G Fox2,3, Christopher J Bertozzi1,4, Jennifer L Pierce1, Nicholas Said1,5, David R Diduch6. 1. Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia, 1215 Lee St, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. 2. Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia, 1215 Lee St, PO Box 800170, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA. fox.michael@mayo.edu. 3. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, 5777 E. Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ, 85054, USA. fox.michael@mayo.edu. 4. Radiology Associates of St. Petersburg, 1901 Ulmerton Road; Suite 455, Clearwater, FL, 33762, USA. 5. Duke University Musculoskeletal Imaging, DUMC Box 3808, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. 6. Department or Orthopedic Surgery, University of Virginia, PO Box 800159 HSC, Charlottesville, VA, 22908, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine how often patients with surgically proven labral tears have labral signal on shoulder MR arthrography (MRA) that is not equal to gadolinium or fluid on T1- and T2-weighted images, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with surgical repair of a SLAP or Bankart labral tear within 95 days of an MRA were included. Using cartilage signal as an internal reference, two musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists retrospectively categorized labral signal as T1-hyperintense, T1-gadolinium, T2-hyperintense, or T2-fluid. In patients without T1-gadolinium or T2-fluid labral signal, secondary findings such as the orientation, extent, shape, and width of the abnormal signal was recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's test and ANOVA. RESULTS: Sixty-one labral tears (36 SLAP and 25 Bankart) in 54 patients (mean age, 30.7; F:M 8:46) met the inclusion criteria. In 67% and 76% of SLAP and Bankart labral tears, T1-gadolinium signal was present (p = 0.43). T2-fluid signal was present in 50% and 92% of these same labral tears (p = 0.001). The absence of T1-gadolinium or T2-fluid signal was more common in SLAP tears (33%) compared to Bankart tears (8%) (p = 0.02). In the SLAP cases, at least two secondary findings of a SLAP tear were present in 92% (11/12). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of surfacing T1-gadolinium or T2-fluid labral signal is unusual in Bankart tears but relatively common in SLAP tears. However, a SLAP tear was diagnosed in 92% of these 12 cases when two secondary findings were present.
OBJECTIVE: To determine how often patients with surgically proven labral tears have labral signal on shoulder MR arthrography (MRA) that is not equal to gadolinium or fluid on T1- and T2-weighted images, respectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with surgical repair of a SLAP or Bankart labral tear within 95 days of an MRA were included. Using cartilage signal as an internal reference, two musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists retrospectively categorized labral signal as T1-hyperintense, T1-gadolinium, T2-hyperintense, or T2-fluid. In patients without T1-gadolinium or T2-fluid labral signal, secondary findings such as the orientation, extent, shape, and width of the abnormal signal was recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's test and ANOVA. RESULTS: Sixty-one labral tears (36 SLAP and 25 Bankart) in 54 patients (mean age, 30.7; F:M 8:46) met the inclusion criteria. In 67% and 76% of SLAP and Bankart labral tears, T1-gadolinium signal was present (p = 0.43). T2-fluid signal was present in 50% and 92% of these same labral tears (p = 0.001). The absence of T1-gadolinium or T2-fluid signal was more common in SLAP tears (33%) compared to Bankart tears (8%) (p = 0.02). In the SLAP cases, at least two secondary findings of a SLAP tear were present in 92% (11/12). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of surfacing T1-gadolinium or T2-fluid labral signal is unusual in Bankart tears but relatively common in SLAP tears. However, a SLAP tear was diagnosed in 92% of these 12 cases when two secondary findings were present.
Authors: J T Bencardino; J Beltran; Z S Rosenberg; A Rokito; S Schmahmann; J Mota; J M Mellado; J Zuckerman; F Cuomo; D Rose Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Thorsten K Wischer; Miriam A Bredella; Harry K Genant; David W Stoller; Frederic W Bost; Phillip F J Tirman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Steven C Wagner; Mark E Schweitzer; William B Morrison; John M Fenlin; Arthur R Bartolozzi Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Simone Waldt; Andreas Burkart; Peter Lange; Andreas B Imhoff; Ernst J Rummeny; Klaus Woertler Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Simone Waldt; Andreas Burkart; Andreas B Imhoff; Melanie Bruegel; Ernst J Rummeny; Klaus Woertler Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Adam D Singer; Jeffrey Rosenthal; Monica Umpierrez; Yi Guo; Felix Gonzalez; Eric Wagner Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 2.199