Literature DB >> 7644620

Error patterns in the MR imaging evaluation of menisci of the knee.

W W Justice1, S F Quinn.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To categorize errors in interpretation of magnetic resonance (MR) images of the knee and explain the discrepancy between MR imaging and diagnostic arthroscopic findings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five hundred sixty-one patients underwent arthroscopy and MR imaging of the knee. Prospective and retrospective readings were used to categorize tear type and location. Sixty-six patients had 68 discrepancies between MR imaging and arthroscopic findings.
RESULTS: Prospective interpretation of MR images of the lateral meniscus had a sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 98%, and accuracy of 93%. For images of the medial meniscus, sensitivity was 96%; specificity, 91%; and accuracy, 95%. The number of diagnostic errors at retrospective analysis was 76% (n = 52) of the number at prospective analysis.
CONCLUSION: MR imaging is accurate in evaluation for meniscal tears. Most errors in interpretation that occur at prospective evaluation also occur at retrospective evaluation. Some false-positive errors may be related to incomplete arthroscopic evaluation of the meniscus and confusion between what represents fraying and what represents a tear.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7644620     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.196.3.7644620

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  19 in total

1.  Silent meniscal abnormalities in athletes: magnetic resonance imaging of asymptomatic competitive gymnasts.

Authors:  C N Ludman; D O Hough; T G Cooper; A Gottschalk
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 13.800

Review 2.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee.

Authors:  W D Prickett; S I Ward; M J Matava
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  Magnetic resonance diagnosis of posterior horn tears of the lateral meniscus using a thin axial plane: the zip sign--a preliminary study.

Authors:  P Y Savoye; J N Ravey; C Dubois; L Pittet Barbier; A Courvoisier; D Saragaglia; G Ferretti
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-07-20       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging as a tool to predict reparability of longitudinal full-thickness meniscus lesions.

Authors:  G Nourissat; P Beaufils; O Charrois; T Ait Si Selmi; P Thoreux; B Moyen; X Cassard
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Medial meniscal cyst: a case report.

Authors:  Mauro Spina; Giacomo Sabbioni; Domenico Tigani
Journal:  Chir Organi Mov       Date:  2008-11-15

6.  Comparison of spin echo T1-weighted sequences versus fast spin-echo proton density-weighted sequences for evaluation of meniscal tears at 1.5 T.

Authors:  Andrew B Wolff; Lorenzo L Pesce; Jim S Wu; L Ryan Smart; Michael J Medvecky; Andrew H Haims
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Direct access magnetic resonance imaging of the knee for GPs. Patients should be seen by an experienced orthopaedic surgeon.

Authors:  R Mackenzie; D Edwards; A K Dixon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-03-30

Review 8.  [Meniscus and ligament injuries].

Authors:  C Glaser; C Trumm; J Scheidler; A Heuck
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 0.635

9.  The efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging in acute multi-ligament injuries.

Authors:  Jyrki Halinen; Mika Koivikko; Jan Lindahl; Eero Hirvensalo
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Comparative study of imaging at 3.0 T versus 1.5 T of the knee.

Authors:  Scott Wong; Lynne Steinbach; Jian Zhao; Christoph Stehling; C Benjamin Ma; Thomas M Link
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-04-07       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.