Diagnostic Accuracy of an MRI Protocol of the Knee Accelerated Through Parallel Imaging in Correlation to Arthroscopy

Schnaiter, Johannes Walter; Roemer, Frank W.; McKenna-Kuettner, Axel; Patzak, H. J.; May, Matthias; Janka, Rolf; Uder, Michael; Wuest, Wolfgang

doi:10.1055/s-0043-119038

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this time interval, patients may experience trauma or overuse. This may lead to progression of the meniscus pathology and a false-negative diagnosis [25,28,29]. The radial tears and longitudinal tear in our study were very small in size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing meniscal tears: A retrospective cohort study

Bilge¹,

Tokgöz²,

Dur³

et al. 2019

Journal of Surgery and Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Diagnostic arthroscopy is an invasive and an expensive method using for the diagnosis of meniscal tears. The aim of this study was to determine the value of knee magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of meniscal tears and its role in the prevention of unnecessary diagnostic arthroscopy. Methods: A total of 105 patients who underwent knee magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy due to meniscus injury were included in the study. Fifty-nine patients were examined using a 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance scanner and 46 were examined using a 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance scanner. Magnetic resonance imaging findings were evaluated retrospectively in workstations by two radiologists experienced in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Meniscal tears were reported as anterior horn tear, corpus tear or posterior horn tear. Meniscal tears were classified by using surgical classification. Each patient's magnetic resonance images were evaluated with a consensus and compared with the arthroscopic diagnosis. Results: Meniscal tears were detected in 96 out of 106 knees on arthroscopy. By using arthroscopy as the gold standard for diagnosis of meniscal tears, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values of the magnetic resonance imaging evaluation were found as 85.71% (95% CI: 77.84-91.61), 93% (95% CI: 86.11-97.14) and 89.15% (95% CI: 84.17-93), respectively. These values of magnetic resonance imaging were found high in the diagnosis of meniscal tears. Conclusions: Magnetic resonance imaging is an effective imaging method in the diagnosis of meniscal tears. Although the resolution of 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging is higher, 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging is sufficient in routine meniscus tear diagnosis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing meniscal tears: A retrospective cohort study

Bilge¹,

Tokgöz²,

Dur³

et al. 2019

Journal of Surgery and Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These include technical advances like parallel imaging or improvements in 3D fast spin echo imaging that now allow for acquisition of triplanar MRI of the knee with fat-suppressed fluid sensitive contrast in less than 5 min 35–37 . These methodologic advances may potentially be applied to large knee OA screening endeavors with markedly reduced image acquisition time and costs 38 . …”

Section: Why Mri May Offer Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of radiography and MRI for eligibility assessment in DMOAD trials of knee OA

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently no disease-modifying drugs for osteoarthritis have been approved. There are several reasons for failure of clinical trials in the past, including the commonly applied definition of structural eligibility based on radiographic assessment. In the context of precision medicine it will be of increasing relevance to find the appropriate patient for a specific treatment approach. Phenotypical stratification by imaging at eligibility will be paramount in the future and cannot be achieved using radiography alone. Furthermore, joints at high risk for faster progression need to be identified, as these may allow a more efficient DMOAD trial design. In addition, joints at high risk for collapse need to be excluded at screening. MRI may be able to offer solutions in this context, and commonly perceived hurdles in the application of MRI at eligibility assessment are being addressed as a result of technological advances and simplified image assessment.

show abstract

“…On the front side, the knee joint is not protected by a thicker muscular covering, and, due to this structural weakness, this joint is prone to injury by direct trauma and rotation. Twisting injuries are usually presented as a tear of the meniscus and ligaments [1]. Meniscal injuries are usually longitudinal and accompanied with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries in 55-65% cases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MRI has become a popular and practical tool on the basis of which we make the final conclusion about the ACL and meniscus condition and choose for arthroscopy [4]. Arthroscopy can be used for the diagnosis and treatment, but it is at the same time an invasive method [1]. Arthroscopic examination gives us to evaluate, visualize and confirm if the diagnosis based on clinical examination and MRI is correct [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic resonance imaging vs. arthroscopy in diagnosing anterior cruciate ligament and meniscus injuries - is there a difference

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction/Objective. The knee joint is prone to injuries caused by direct or indirect trauma. The meniscus and ligament injuries, cannot be completely diagnosed with clinical examination, therefore we use additional non-invasive and invasive diagnostic methods such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and arthroscopy. The aim was to compare the accuracy of MRI and objective knee findings based on arthroscopic examination in case of meniscus and anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Methods. The study involved 50 patients treated with elective surgery which mandatory involved arthroscopic visualization of the knee structures. We compared the MRI findings, obtained from different institutions, and arthroscopic knee findings for all the patients involved in the study. Results. There were 50 patients included in the study with mean age of 31 years. MRI showed that Anterior cruciate ligament was damaged in 41 patients, while arthroscopy confirmed damage in 43 patients. Medial meniscus was damaged in 31 patients on MRI and in 27 on arthroscopic examination. Lateral meniscus was injured in 35 patients on MRI and arthroscopy showed damage in 32 patients. Using ?2 test we found no significant difference between MRI and arthroscopy as diagnostic methods. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test shows similar results between MRI and arthroscopy findings. Conclusion. A comparative analysis of MRI and arthroscopy diagnostic value in case of anterior cruciate ligament, medial meniscus and lateral meniscus injuries have shown that there is no significant difference between these two methods.

show abstract

Diagnostic Accuracy of an MRI Protocol of the Knee Accelerated Through Parallel Imaging in Correlation to Arthroscopy

Cited by 18 publications

References 27 publications

The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing meniscal tears: A retrospective cohort study

The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing meniscal tears: A retrospective cohort study

The role of radiography and MRI for eligibility assessment in DMOAD trials of knee OA

Magnetic resonance imaging vs. arthroscopy in diagnosing anterior cruciate ligament and meniscus injuries - is there a difference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About