The value of magnetic resonance arthrography in the evaluation of repaired menisci

Keçeci, Burçin; Biçer, Elcil Kaya; Arkun, Remide; Argın, Mehmet; Taşkıran, Emin

doi:10.1007/s00590-014-1450-z

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[125][126][127] This hyperintense signal may be from immature fibrovascular granulation tissue or mature fibrocartilaginous scar tissue. Arthrographic techniques can be useful in these cases, 128,129 but the authors find that conventional MR imaging still is the diagnostic workhorse, commonly showing displaced meniscus fragments, new tears at other locations, and internal derangements not involving the menisci (Fig. 22).…”

Section: Repair Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 95%

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Postoperative Meniscus

Boutin

Fritz²,

Marder

2014

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Repair Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 95%

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Postoperative Meniscus

Boutin

Fritz²,

Marder

2014

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Cılız et al recommended the use of direct MRA if Grade 3 signal intensity is the only finding on MRI in patients with more than 25% meniscal resection and who do not have sufficient joint effusion. The disadvantages of MRA are that it is an invasive, expensive, and time-consuming procedure [ 1 , 14 ]. Some reasons for false-negative results when performing direct MRA could be due to the formation of granulation tissue that obstructs the flow of the contrast material into the tear or if the contrast material is too viscous and doesn’t track into the meniscal tear [ 17 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some reasons for false-negative results when performing direct MRA could be due to the formation of granulation tissue that obstructs the flow of the contrast material into the tear or if the contrast material is too viscous and doesn’t track into the meniscal tear [ 17 ]. However, it is less invasive than second-look arthroscopy and may prevent unnecessary procedures [ 14 ]. We intentionally decided to include studies only published within the last 15 years as the introduction of the PACS system and the use of newer magnets make some of the older studies’ results rendered obsolete [ 13 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knee meniscal retears after repair: A systematic review comparing diagnostic imaging modalities

Syed

Zaki

Lakshmanan

et al. 2022

Libyan Journal of Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The meniscus is a relatively avascular fibrocartilaginous structure that provides a key role in shock absorption and load transmission. However, accurate diagnosis of meniscal retear can present a clinical challenge. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review on the available literature, which compare the sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of different diagnostic modalities of diagnosing knee meniscal retears in patients who have undergone surgical meniscal repair, such as Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Magnetic Resonance Arthrography with intraarticular contrast (direct MRA), and a combination of MRI and direct MRA. Two authors independently searched two databases (PubMed and Scopus) for literature related to knee meniscus retear according to the PRISMA guidelines. Four studies were found, which resulted in 291 patients with 293 menisci. All studies were published in 2008 and 2014. In our analysis, we calculated sensitivity to be 78.79% (95% CI, 64.07–93.51), specificity to be 56.58% (95% CI, 20.21–92.94), and overall accuracy to be 66.25% (95% CI, 54.29–78.22) for MRI and sensitivity to be 87.84% (95% CI, 83.93–91.74), specificity to be 88.68% (95% CI, 81.93–95.43), and overall accuracy to be 87.22% (95% CI, 82.22–91.62) for direct MRA. We recommend the use of direct MRA for the diagnosis of meniscal retears due to its higher sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as compared to MRI and its reduced cost and invasive nature as compared to second-look arthroscopy. However, our review is limited by the number of studies available on this topic. More studies using study designs such as randomized controlled trials, involving MRI, direct MRA, and combinations of such techniques, should be performed to accurately assess the different techniques and aid in designing guidelines to guide the diagnosis of meniscal retears following meniscal repair.

show abstract

“…55 Kececi et al found a sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of 80, 100, and 84%, respectively, for MR arthrography in the diagnosis of complete and incomplete healed meniscal repairs, and sensitivity and accuracy of 94% when incomplete healed lesions where left out. 59 Meniscal Replacement…”

Section: Mri Appearancementioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosing Meniscal Pathology and Understanding How to Evaluate a Postoperative Meniscus Based on the Operative Procedure

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) represents the preferred noninvasive imaging technique to diagnose meniscal pathology in the pre- and postoperative setting. Furthermore, characterization of meniscal tissue MR properties has been possible by the development of advanced MRI techniques. Suspected meniscal tears are a frequent indication for MRI and the International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine (ISAKOS) classification system has been developed to facilitate accurate and uniform reporting of such meniscal tears. Partial meniscectomy and meniscal suture repair are among the commonly performed procedures and several signs have been described to detect postoperative recurrent tears on MRI. Other techniques that have proven useful for meniscal assessment are ultrasound (US) and computed tomography (CT) arthrography. In recent years, US is being increasingly used in the selective assessment of some meniscal pathology such as tears, parameniscal cysts and meniscal extrusion as it is a relatively inexpensive, accessible, and safe technique. CT arthrography has been advocated as an acceptable alternative in patients with contraindications for MRI, with comparable diagnostic performance.

show abstract

The value of magnetic resonance arthrography in the evaluation of repaired menisci

Abstract: The findings of this study showed that MR arthrography was a reliable diagnostic tool in evaluating previously repaired menisci. Yet diagnosis of incomplete meniscal lesions seemed to be challenging.

Cited by 9 publications

References 19 publications

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Postoperative Meniscus

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Postoperative Meniscus

Knee meniscal retears after repair: A systematic review comparing diagnostic imaging modalities

Diagnosing Meniscal Pathology and Understanding How to Evaluate a Postoperative Meniscus Based on the Operative Procedure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About