2022
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12020537
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Knee Injury Detection Using Deep Learning on MRI Studies: A Systematic Review

Abstract: The improved treatment of knee injuries critically relies on having an accurate and cost-effective detection. In recent years, deep-learning-based approaches have monopolized knee injury detection in MRI studies. The aim of this paper is to present the findings of a systematic literature review of knee (anterior cruciate ligament, meniscus, and cartilage) injury detection papers using deep learning. The systematic review was carried out following the PRISMA guidelines on several databases, including PubMed, Co… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Performance and accuracy as seen among the studies ranged from 72.5% to 100% which is effective enough for expanding the medical experts' knowledge and diagnostic skills for knee injuries. Our findings were in line with a previous systematic review conducted by Siouras et al [41], who also quoted diagnostic accuracy of 72.5-100%, but the review was conducted on 22 studies. Another systematic review was conducted by Kunze et al [16] including 11 studies, among which five evaluated ACL tears, five assessed meniscal tears, and one study assessed both where the area under the curve (AUC) for detecting ACL tear was in the range of 0.895 to 0.980 and for meniscus tear was 0.847 to 0.910.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Performance and accuracy as seen among the studies ranged from 72.5% to 100% which is effective enough for expanding the medical experts' knowledge and diagnostic skills for knee injuries. Our findings were in line with a previous systematic review conducted by Siouras et al [41], who also quoted diagnostic accuracy of 72.5-100%, but the review was conducted on 22 studies. Another systematic review was conducted by Kunze et al [16] including 11 studies, among which five evaluated ACL tears, five assessed meniscal tears, and one study assessed both where the area under the curve (AUC) for detecting ACL tear was in the range of 0.895 to 0.980 and for meniscus tear was 0.847 to 0.910.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Machine learning in MRI can also be used for the assessment of vertebrae, discs, and muscles in patients with lower back pain [ 66 ]. In a systematic review, Siouras and colleagues stated that AI in MRI has the potential to be on par with human-level performance and has shown a prediction accuracy ranging from 72.5–100% [ 67 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Images of internal structures, such as the brain or joints Diagnosing internal injuries or diseases (i.e., cardiovascular diseases [161], cancers [162,163], knee injuries [164])…”
Section: Mri (Image)mentioning
confidence: 99%