Lateral meniscus posterior root tear in anterior cruciate ligament injury can be detected using MRI-specific signs in combination but not individually

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate (1) the diagnostic value of using single and multiple magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings for lateral meniscus posterior root tear (LMPRT) detection in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and (2) the influence of time from ACL injury to MRI assessment on LMPRT detection. Finally, we investigated the relationship between LMPRT and bone bruising. Methods In all, 231 knees with ACL injury, 32 with LMPRT, were retrospectively assessed. Cases were evaluated for LMPRT based on the cleft, ghost, and truncated triangle signs, used individually or in combination. To assess the influence of the timing of the MRI assessment on LMPRT detection, we also evaluated the overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in cases in which MRI was performed within 2 weeks of injury. The number of condyles with bone bruising was assessed and then compared between patients with and without LMPRT. Results Although the sensitivity and specificity of the three signs individually were 34.4-65.6% and 94.0-97.0%, when at least one of these signs was positive, the sensitivity and specificity were 84.4% and 90.5%, respectively. However, the diagnostic value of each sign when MRI was performed within 2 weeks of injury was lower than the overall value. There was a significant difference in the number of condyles with bone bruising between the LMPRT (3 ± 1) and non-LMPRT (2 ± 2) groups. Conclusions Although the sensitivity of each sign for LMPRT was low, LMPRT could be detected adequately if these signs were used in combination. Therefore, surgeons should detect LMPRT using these three signs in combination, not individually. Level of evidence IV.

Deep Learning-Based Image Feature with Arthroscopy-Aided Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Meniscus Injury of Knee Joint

“…where L is the peak signal, f is the ideal image, g is the image to be estimated, MSE(f, g) is the mean square error of the image, 2 , and M × N is the size of the image to be estimated. e structural similarity (SSIM) evaluation result is similar to the human senses, which is calculated as follows: (14) where μ f , μ g , σ f , and σ g are the mean values and standard deviations of the ideal image f and the image g to be evaluated, respectively, σ fg is the covariance of f and g, c 1 � (k 1 R) 2 , c 2 � (k 2 R) 2 , R is the range of image pixel values, k 1 and k 2 are 0.01 and 0.03, respectively, c 3 � c 2 /2, α � β � c � 1, and L(f, g), C(f, g), and S(f, g) represent image brightness, structure, and contrast, respectively.…”

“…Meniscus injuries are often diagnosed by arthroscopy, knee ultrasound, CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Arthroscopy is the gold standard for meniscus diagnosis, but it is invasive and increases the probability of infection in patients [2]. e diagnostic accuracy of B-ultrasound for knee joint meniscus injury is not high [3].…”

Three-Dimensional Reconstruction Algorithm-Based Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation of Biomechanical Changes in Articular Cartilage in Patients after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

“…e above four examinations are used to comprehensively diagnose the stability of ACL. After ACL injury, X-ray or enhanced computed tomography (CT) examination is often used to evaluate the surgical results, but the effect is not ideal [7][8][9]. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an indispensable means of examination.…”

Deep Learning-Based MRI in Diagnosis of Fracture of Tibial Plateau Combined with Meniscus Injury

“…Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has high resolution for the soft tissue of the knee joint [7] and has high specificity and sensitivity for the diagnosis of injury sites. More importantly, MRI examination is noninvasive with low radiation [8,9], so MRI is widely used to diagnose meniscus injuries in clinical practice.…”