1999
DOI: 10.1007/s002560050510
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MR imaging findings in spring ligament insufficiency

Abstract: The medial portion of the spring ligament can be reliably assessed on routine MRI. The findings of spring ligament insufficiency on MRI are only moderately sensitive but highly specific.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
40
1
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
3
40
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In our study, the mean thickness of the proximal and distal measurements of the superomedial CNL in patients with insufficiency were 5.1 and 6.1 mm. This is quite a different result from an MRI study [5] in which the mean thickness of the abnormal superomedial ligament was 6.5 mm. However, in that study, the maximum ligament thickness was measured, and therefore some measurements were obtained at the proximal portion and some at the distal portion of the superomedial CNL.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 56%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In our study, the mean thickness of the proximal and distal measurements of the superomedial CNL in patients with insufficiency were 5.1 and 6.1 mm. This is quite a different result from an MRI study [5] in which the mean thickness of the abnormal superomedial ligament was 6.5 mm. However, in that study, the maximum ligament thickness was measured, and therefore some measurements were obtained at the proximal portion and some at the distal portion of the superomedial CNL.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 56%
“…Heterogeneous increase in signal and thickening of ligament may be seen in patients with associated posterior tibial tendinosis [5,6]. In two different anatomical [2] and ultrasound studies [12], the mean width of the normal ligament at the talar head was 2.5 and 3 mm respectively as compared to 3.6 mm (distal measurement) in our study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 3 more Smart Citations