Diagnostic performance of 3D TSE MRI versus 2D TSE MRI of the knee at 1.5 T, with prompt arthroscopic correlation, in the detection of meniscal and cruciate ligament tears

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare the diagnostic performance of the three-dimensional turbo spin-echo (3D TSE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique with the performance of the standard two-dimensional turbo spin-echo (2D TSE) protocol at 1.5 T, in the detection of meniscal and ligament tears.Materials and MethodsThirty-eight patients were imaged twice, first with a standard multiplanar 2D TSE MR technique, and then with a 3D TSE technique, both in the same 1.5 T MRI scanner. The patients underwent knee arthroscopy within the first three days after the MRI. Using arthroscopy as the reference standard, we determined the diagnostic performance and agreement.ResultsFor detecting anterior cruciate ligament tears, the 3D TSE and routine 2D TSE techniques showed similar values for sensitivity (93% and 93%, respectively) and specificity (80% and 85%, respectively). For detecting medial meniscal tears, the two techniques also had similar sensitivity (85% and 83%, respectively) and specificity (68% and 71%, respectively). In addition, for detecting lateral meniscal tears, the two techniques had similar sensitivity (58% and 54%, respectively) and specificity (82% and 92%, respectively). There was a substantial to almost perfect intraobserver and interobserver agreement when comparing the readings for both techniques.ConclusionThe 3D TSE technique has a diagnostic performance similar to that of the routine 2D TSE protocol for detecting meniscal and anterior cruciate ligament tears at 1.5 T, with the advantage of faster acquisition.

10‐Min 3D Turbo Spin Echo MRI of the Knee in Children: Arthroscopy‐Validated Accuracy for the Diagnosis of Internal Derangement

“…Although comparison with the performance of 3D MRI for the diagnosis of internal derangement in adults is limited due to differences between immature and mature knees, the diagnostic performance of our 10‐min 3D MRI protocol compares favorably as well. Prior studies in adults found sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of 85–100%, 68–95%, and 79–97% for diagnosing medial meniscal tears, 58–95%, 82–96%, and 74–94% for lateral meniscal tears, 90–100%, 80–98%, and 89–99% for anterior cruciate ligament tears, and 100%, 97–100%, and 97–100% for posterior cruciate ligament tears . Similar to previous studies of 3D MRI, there was a very good interreader agreement in our study .…”

Cruciate ligament injuries of the knee: A meta‐analysis of the diagnostic performance of 3D MRI

“…5,30 The resulting 22 studies consisting of 1298 MRI examinations with 3D sequences were included in our metaanalysis. 3,5,6,8,[12][13][14][15][16][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42] A PRISMA flow chart displaying process of literature review, study screening, and study selection is shown in Fig. 1.…”

“…3D sequences also provide thin, continuous sections through the knee joint, which reduces the effects of partial volume averaging . Although prior studies have shown that 3D sequences could provide comparable accuracy to 2D sequences in detecting cartilage defects of the knee, the available data in the current literature regarding the diagnostic performance of 3D sequences for detecting cruciate ligament injuries are conflicting and contradictory . While some studies have found that 3D sequences are not as accurate as 2D sequences for detecting cruciate ligament injuries, others have suggested that 3D sequences could replace 2D sequences in clinical practice .…”

“…10 Although prior studies have shown that 3D sequences could provide comparable accuracy to 2D sequences in detecting cartilage defects of the knee, 11 the available data in the current literature regarding the diagnostic performance of 3D sequences for detecting cruciate ligament injuries are conflicting and contradictory. [12][13][14][15][16] While some studies have found that 3D sequences are not as accurate as 2D sequences for detecting cruciate ligament injuries, 12,15 others have suggested that 3D sequences could replace 2D sequences in clinical practice. 14,16 The literature is especially difficult to interpret due to the wide variety of scanners, coils, acquisition and reconstruction techniques, and MPR methods involved.…”

“…[12][13][14][15][16] While some studies have found that 3D sequences are not as accurate as 2D sequences for detecting cruciate ligament injuries, 12,15 others have suggested that 3D sequences could replace 2D sequences in clinical practice. 14,16 The literature is especially difficult to interpret due to the wide variety of scanners, coils, acquisition and reconstruction techniques, and MPR methods involved. Additionally, different characteristics of 3D MRI including the optimal sequence for evaluation of cruciate ligament injuries have not been fully explored.…”