Limits...
Indications requiring preoperative magnetic resonance imaging before knee arthroscopy.

Roßbach BP, Pietschmann MF, Gülecyüz MF, Niethammer TR, Ficklscherer A, Wild S, Jansson V, Müller PE - Arch Med Sci (2014)

Bottom Line: This raises the question in which suspected diagnoses MRI really has influence on diagnosis and consecutive surgical therapy.Specificity, sensitivity, negative/positive predictive value and accuracy of MRI were calculated in comparison to arthroscopic findings.We found sensitivity/specificity of 58%/93% for anterior horn, 94%/46% for posterior horn of medial meniscus and 71%/81% for anterior and 62%/82% for posterior horn of lateral meniscus.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Knee arthroscopy knee is gold standard in diagnosis and simultaneous treatment of knee disorders. But most patients undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before arthroscopy, although MRI results are not always consistent with arthroscopic findings. This raises the question in which suspected diagnoses MRI really has influence on diagnosis and consecutive surgical therapy.

Material and methods: Preoperative MRI of 330 patients with knee disorders were compared with arthroscopic findings. The MRI were performed by 23 radiologists without specialization in musculoskeletal diagnostics. Specificity, sensitivity, negative/positive predictive value and accuracy of MRI were calculated in comparison to arthroscopic findings.

Results: We found sensitivity/specificity of 58%/93% for anterior horn, 94%/46% for posterior horn of medial meniscus and 71%/81% for anterior and 62%/82% for posterior horn of lateral meniscus. Related to anterior cruciate ligament injuries we showed sensitivity/specificity of 82%/91% for grade 0 + I and 72%/96% for grade II + III. For Cartilage damage sensitivity/specificity of 98%/7% for grade I-, 89%/29% for grade II-, 96%/38% for grade III- and 96%/69% for grade IV-lesions were revealed.

Conclusions: The MRI should not be used as routine diagnostic tool for knee pain. No relevant information for meniscal lesions and anterior cruciate ligament ruptures has been gained with MRI from non-specialized outside imaging centres. The MRI should not be used as routine diagnostic tool for knee pain. No relevant information for meniscal lesions and anterior cruciate ligament ruptures has been gained with MRI from non-specialized outside imaging centres.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Number of radiologists without musculoskeletal specialization generating the MRI reports
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4296071&req=5

Figure 0001: Number of radiologists without musculoskeletal specialization generating the MRI reports

Mentions: Preoperative MRI scans of all patients were performed and evaluated by a total of 23 radiologists in outpatient radiology units without specialization in musculoskeletal diagnostics (Figure 1). Radiologists did not assess the MRI findings of their colleagues again. Closed MR scanners with a magnetic flux density of 1.5 Tesla were used in all cases. Standard imaging sequences at outside imaging centres included coronal T1-weighted sequence and proton-density turbo spin-echo fat-suppressed sequences for sagittal, axial and coronal planes.


Indications requiring preoperative magnetic resonance imaging before knee arthroscopy.

Roßbach BP, Pietschmann MF, Gülecyüz MF, Niethammer TR, Ficklscherer A, Wild S, Jansson V, Müller PE - Arch Med Sci (2014)

Number of radiologists without musculoskeletal specialization generating the MRI reports
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4296071&req=5

Figure 0001: Number of radiologists without musculoskeletal specialization generating the MRI reports
Mentions: Preoperative MRI scans of all patients were performed and evaluated by a total of 23 radiologists in outpatient radiology units without specialization in musculoskeletal diagnostics (Figure 1). Radiologists did not assess the MRI findings of their colleagues again. Closed MR scanners with a magnetic flux density of 1.5 Tesla were used in all cases. Standard imaging sequences at outside imaging centres included coronal T1-weighted sequence and proton-density turbo spin-echo fat-suppressed sequences for sagittal, axial and coronal planes.

Bottom Line: This raises the question in which suspected diagnoses MRI really has influence on diagnosis and consecutive surgical therapy.Specificity, sensitivity, negative/positive predictive value and accuracy of MRI were calculated in comparison to arthroscopic findings.We found sensitivity/specificity of 58%/93% for anterior horn, 94%/46% for posterior horn of medial meniscus and 71%/81% for anterior and 62%/82% for posterior horn of lateral meniscus.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Knee arthroscopy knee is gold standard in diagnosis and simultaneous treatment of knee disorders. But most patients undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before arthroscopy, although MRI results are not always consistent with arthroscopic findings. This raises the question in which suspected diagnoses MRI really has influence on diagnosis and consecutive surgical therapy.

Material and methods: Preoperative MRI of 330 patients with knee disorders were compared with arthroscopic findings. The MRI were performed by 23 radiologists without specialization in musculoskeletal diagnostics. Specificity, sensitivity, negative/positive predictive value and accuracy of MRI were calculated in comparison to arthroscopic findings.

Results: We found sensitivity/specificity of 58%/93% for anterior horn, 94%/46% for posterior horn of medial meniscus and 71%/81% for anterior and 62%/82% for posterior horn of lateral meniscus. Related to anterior cruciate ligament injuries we showed sensitivity/specificity of 82%/91% for grade 0 + I and 72%/96% for grade II + III. For Cartilage damage sensitivity/specificity of 98%/7% for grade I-, 89%/29% for grade II-, 96%/38% for grade III- and 96%/69% for grade IV-lesions were revealed.

Conclusions: The MRI should not be used as routine diagnostic tool for knee pain. No relevant information for meniscal lesions and anterior cruciate ligament ruptures has been gained with MRI from non-specialized outside imaging centres. The MRI should not be used as routine diagnostic tool for knee pain. No relevant information for meniscal lesions and anterior cruciate ligament ruptures has been gained with MRI from non-specialized outside imaging centres.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus