Purpose The purpose of this study is to retrospectively compare accuracy of single magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography series in Abduction External Rotation (ABER) with conventional MR arthrography for detection and characterisation of anteroinferior labroligamentous lesions, with arthroscopy as reference standard. Interobserver variability of both protocols was determined. Methods and materials Institutional review board approval was obtained; informed consent was waived. MR arthrograms, including oblique axial fat suppressed T1-weighted images in ABER position and conventional imaging directions of 250 patients (170 men, 80 women; mean age, 36 years), were retrospectively and independently evaluated by three reviewers. Reviewers were blinded to clinical information and arthroscopic results. Labroligamentous lesions were registered in both ABER and MRa. The lesions were sub-classified (Bankart, Perthes, anterior labrum periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) or lesions not otherwise specified). Inter-observer agreement was assessed by Kappa statistics for all 250 patients. Ninety-two of 250 patients underwent arthroscopy. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of ABER versus conventional MR arthrography were calculated and compared using paired McNemar test.Results Kappa values of the ABER and conventional MR arthrography ranged from 0.44 to 0.56 and 0.44 to 0.62, respectively. According to arthroscopy, 45 of 92 patients had an intact anteroinferior labrum, and in 44 patients, a labroligamentous lesion (eight Bankart, seven Perthes, 29 ALPSA and three lesions not otherwise specified) was diagnosed. There were no statistically significant differences between ABER and conventional MR arthrography regarding sensitivity (85-89%, 89-96%), specificity (82-91%, 84-89%) and overall accuracy (50-62%, 53-63%). Conclusion The results of a single MR arthrography series in ABER position are comparable with those of conventional MR arthrography for detecting anteroinferior labroligamentous lesions.
Purpose The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate sensitivity and specificity of a single magnetic resonance (MR) arthrography series in abduction external rotation (ABER) position compared with conventional MR arthrography for detection of supraspinatus tendon tears, with arthroscopy as gold standard, and to assess interobserver variability. Materials and methods Institutional review board approval was obtained; informed consent was waived. MR arthrograms of 250 patients (170 men and 80 women; mean age, 36 years) were retrospectively and independently evaluated by three observers. Oblique coronal T1-weighted fatsuppressed images, proton density, and T2-weighted images and axial T1-weighted images and oblique sagittal T1-weighted fat-suppressed images were analyzed to detect supraspinatus tendon tears. Separately, a single T1-weighted fat-suppressed oblique axial series in ABER position was evaluated. Both protocols were scored randomly without knowledge of patients_ clinical history and arthroscopy results. Tears were subclassified, based on articular surface integrity and extension (Lee classification). Interobserver agreement was assessed by kappa statistics for all patients. Ninety-two of 250 patients underwent arthroscopy; sensitivity and specificity of ABER and conventional MR arthrography were calculated and compared using paired McNemar test. Results Weighted kappa values of ABER and conventional MR arthrography were 0.48-0.65 and 0.60-0.67, respectively. According to arthroscopy, 69 of 92 patients had an intact cuff, and 23 patients had a cuff tear (16 partial thickness and seven full thickness). There were no statistically significant differences between ABER and conventional MR arthrography regarding sensitivity (48-61% and 52-70%, respectively) and specificity (80-94% and 91-95%). Conclusion Sensitivity and specificity of a single T1-weighted series in ABER position and conventional MR arthrography are comparable for assessment of rotator cuff tears.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.