Clinical value of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee

Efficacy of Arthroscopic Treatment for Concurrent Medial Meniscus Posterior Horn and Lateral Meniscus Anterior Horn Injury: A Retrospective Single Center Study

Objective

To investigate the effectiveness of arthroscopic surgery for combined tears of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus (PHMM) and the anterior horn of the lateral meniscus (AHLM).

Methods

Between September 2009 and December 2013, a retrospective investigation was performed on 48 patients (48 knees) with combined tears of PHMM and AHLM who underwent arthroscopic surgery. All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnosis in the outpatient department. After admission, other basic examinations were performed. PHMM was treated with partial meniscectomy and AHLM was treated with external–internal suture or partial meniscectomy. Curative effect was evaluated according to Lysholm score and IKDC score. The differences of the functions as well as Lysholm and IKDC scores pre‐ and postoperatively were compared, while the diagnostic accuracy of MRI and arthroscopy for PHMM and AHLM were compared.

Results

Seven patients with combined tears of PHMM and AHLM were misdiagnosed during MRI examination when arthroscopy was used as the gold standard. All patients were followed up for an average of 34.58 months (range 10–52 months) and all incisions healed by first intention with no obvious complication. The preoperative and postoperative Lysholm scores were 47.22 ± 2.77 and 87.36 ± 5.45, respectively. The IKDC scores are 54.73 ± 4.65 preoperatively and 89.62 ± 3.71 postoperatively. The positive rates of the diagnosis through MRI and arthroscopic surgery is 85.42% and 100%, respectively. At the last follow‐up, the patients had no pain, weakness, and instability, and tenderness in medial and lateral joint space disappeared. Mcmurray test was weakly positive in four patients. Excellent outcome was achieved in 39 cases, and a good outcome was achieved in five cases; the good to excellent rate was 91.67%.

Conclusion

MRI examination of combined tears of PHMM and AHLM may result in misdiagnosis. Arthroscopic primary repair seemed to be an effective surgical option for treatment of combined tears of PHMM and AHLM.

Management of traumatic meniscus tears: the 2019 ESSKA meniscus consensus

PURPOSE

The importance of meniscus integrity in the prevention of early osteoarthritis is well known, and preservation is accepted as the primary goal. The purpose of the ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy) European consensus on traumatic meniscus tears was to provide recommendations for the treatment of meniscus tears based on both scientific evidence and the clinical experience of knee experts.

METHODS

Three groups of surgeons and scientists elaborated and ratified the so-called formal consensus process to define the recommendations for the management of traumatic meniscus tears. A traumatic meniscus tear was defined as a tear with an acute onset of symptoms caused by a sufficient trauma. The expert groups included a steering group of eight European surgeons and scientists, a rating group of another nineteen European surgeons, and a peer review group. The steering group prepared twenty-seven question and answer sets based on the scientific literature. The quality of the answers received grades of A (a high level of scientific support), B (scientific presumption), C (a low level of scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question and answer sets were then submitted to and evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 (= totally inappropriate) to 9 (= totally appropriate) points. Thereafter, the comments of the members of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the finalized question and answer sets were submitted for final review by the peer review group composed of representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies. Eighteen representatives replied.

RESULTS

The review of the literature revealed a rather low scientific quality of studies examining the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears. Of the 27 questions, only one question received a grade of A (a high level of scientific support), and another received a grade of B (scientific presumption). The remaining questions received grades of C and D. The mean rating of all questions by the rating group was 8.2 (95% confidence interval 8.1-8.4). A general agreement that MRI should be performed on a systematic basis was not achieved. However, MRI was recommended when arthroscopy would be considered to identify concomitant pathologies. In this case, the indication for MRI should be determined by a musculoskeletal specialist. Based on our data, stable left in situ lateral meniscus tears appear to show a better prognosis than medial tears. When repair is required, surgery should be performed as early as possible. Evidence that biological enhancement such as needling or the application of platelet-rich plasma would improve healing was not identified. Preservation of the meniscus should be considered as the first line of treatment because of an inferior clinical and radiological long-term outcome after partial meniscectomy compared to meniscus repair.

DISCUSSION

The consensus was generated to present the best possible recommendations for the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears and provides some groundwork for a clinical decision-making process regarding the treatment of meniscus tears. Preservation of the meniscus should be the first line of treatment when possible, because the clinical and radiological long-term outcomes are worse after partial meniscectomy than after meniscus preservation. The consensus clearly states that numerous meniscus tears that were considered irreparable should be repaired, e.g., older tears, tears in obese patients, long tears, etc. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Deep-learning-assisted diagnosis for knee magnetic resonance imaging: Development and retrospective validation of MRNet

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee is the preferred method for diagnosing knee injuries. However, interpretation of knee MRI is time-intensive and subject to diagnostic error and variability. An automated system for interpreting knee MRI could prioritize high-risk patients and assist clinicians in making diagnoses. Deep learning methods, in being able to automatically learn layers of features, are well suited for modeling the complex relationships between medical images and their interpretations. In this study we developed a deep learning model for detecting general abnormalities and specific diagnoses (anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] tears and meniscal tears) on knee MRI exams. We then measured the effect of providing the model's predictions to clinical experts during interpretation.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Our dataset consisted of 1,370 knee MRI exams performed at Stanford University Medical Center between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2012 (mean age 38.0 years; 569 [41.5%] female patients). The majority vote of 3 musculoskeletal radiologists established reference standard labels on an internal validation set of 120 exams. We developed MRNet, a convolutional neural network for classifying MRI series and combined predictions from 3 series per exam using logistic regression. In detecting abnormalities, ACL tears, and meniscal tears, this model achieved area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values of 0.937 (95% CI 0.895, 0.980), 0.965 (95% CI 0.938, 0.993), and 0.847 (95% CI 0.780, 0.914), respectively, on the internal validation set. We also obtained a public dataset of 917 exams with sagittal T1-weighted series and labels for ACL injury from Clinical Hospital Centre Rijeka, Croatia. On the external validation set of 183 exams, the MRNet trained on Stanford sagittal T2-weighted series achieved an AUC of 0.824 (95% CI 0.757, 0.892) in the detection of ACL injuries with no additional training, while an MRNet trained on the rest of the external data achieved an AUC of 0.911 (95% CI 0.864, 0.958). We additionally measured the specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of 9 clinical experts (7 board-certified general radiologists and 2 orthopedic surgeons) on the internal validation set both with and without model assistance. Using a 2-sided Pearson's chi-squared test with adjustment for multiple comparisons, we found no significant differences between the performance of the model and that of unassisted general radiologists in detecting abnormalities. General radiologists achieved significantly higher sensitivity in detecting ACL tears (p-value = 0.002; q-value = 0.019) and significantly higher specificity in detecting meniscal tears (p-value = 0.003; q-value = 0.019). Using a 1-tailed t test on the change in performance metrics, we found that providing model predictions significantly increased clinical experts' specificity in identifying ACL tears (p-value < 0.001; q-value = 0.006). The primary limitations of our study include lack of surgical ground truth and the small size of the panel of clinical experts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our deep learning model can rapidly generate accurate clinical pathology classifications of knee MRI exams from both internal and external datasets. Moreover, our results support the assertion that deep learning models can improve the performance of clinical experts during medical imaging interpretation. Further research is needed to validate the model prospectively and to determine its utility in the clinical setting.

AGREEMENT IN DIAGNOSIS OF KNEE INJURIES BY ORTHOPEDISTS WITH CLINICAL EXPERIENCE IN KNEE TREATMENT

Objective:

To analyze the level of agreement in diagnosing knee injury among orthopedists with clinical experience in knee treatment.

Method:

An online questionnaire was used to analyze the ability of orthopedic knee surgeons to diagnose intra-articular knee injuries using MRI, the importance given to this test in their clinical practice, and the agreement between these diagnoses and the radiology report.

Results:

The study participants considered MRI an important tool for clarifying inconclusive diagnoses and surgical planning. The level of agreement between the surgeons and the radiologist was considered to be very slight for posterior cruciate ligament injuries, collateral ligament injuries, and chondral injuries, and was considered slight for anterior cruciate ligament and meniscus injuries.

Conclusion:

A diagnosis of intra-articular knee injury must be based on the patient history, physical examination, and radiological imaging (MRI) in order to provide a complete approach to the patient. Level of Evidence III; Clinical study.

Reliability of magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating meniscal and cartilage injuries in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees

PURPOSE

The accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in assessing meniscal and cartilage injuries in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient knees as compared to arthroscopy was evaluated in the present study.

METHODS

The results of all preoperative MR imaging performed within 3 months prior to the ACL reconstruction were compared against intraoperative arthroscopic findings. A total of 206 patients were identified. The location and type of meniscal injuries as well as the location and grade of the cartilage injuries were studied. The negative predictive value, positive predictive value, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of MR imaging for these 206 cases were calculated and analysed.

RESULTS

In patients with an ACL injury, the highest incidence of concomitant injury was that of medial meniscus tears, 124 (60.2 %), followed by lateral meniscus tears, 105 (51.0 %), and cartilage injuries, 66 (32.0 %). Twenty-three (11.2 %) patients sustained injuries to all of the previously named structures. MR imaging was most accurate in detecting medial meniscus tears (85.9 %). MR imaging for medial meniscus tears also had the highest sensitivity (88.0 %) and positive predictive value (88.7 %), while MR imaging for cartilage injuries had the largest specificity (84.1 %) and negative predictive value (87.1 %). It was least accurate in evaluating lateral meniscus tears (74.3 %). The diagnostic accuracy of medial meniscus imaging is significantly influenced by age and the presence of lateral meniscus tears, while the duration between MR imaging and surgery has greater impact on the likelihood of lateral meniscus and cartilage injuries actually being present during surgery. The majority of meniscus tears missed by MR imaging affected the posterior horn and were complex in nature. Cartilage injuries affecting the medial femoral condyle or medial patella facet were also often missed by MR imaging.

CONCLUSION

MR imaging remains a reliable tool for assessing meniscus tears and cartilage defects preoperatively. It is most accurate when evaluating medial meniscus tears. However, MR imaging should be used with discretion especially if there is a high index of suspicion of lateral meniscus tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Diagnosis of ligamentous and meniscal pathologies in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic findings

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is routinely used to diagnose or support clinical diagnoses for meniscal or ligamentous injuries prior to offering patients arthroscopic treatment. However, the sensitivity of MRI for the detection of meniscal injury is not yet 100%. Sportsmen have occasionally returned to play with undiagnosed meniscal lesions on the basis of a normal MRI examination. This study was designed to assess the diagnostic parameters of MRI in patients with acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.

METHODS

MRI and arthroscopic findings of 320 patients with acute ACL injury were included in this retrospective review. Patients belonged to a single surgeon from a high volume tertiary healthcare institution. All patients had either a MRI or an arthroscopic diagnosis of an acute ACL injury of one knee or both. All patients underwent therapeutic arthroscopy by the senior author routinely as part of arthroscopy-aided ACL reconstruction. Arthroscopic findings were the diagnostic reference based on which the positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, specificity and concordance strength of association of MRI were calculated for ACL, posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), medial meniscus (MM) and lateral meniscus (LM) injuries.

RESULTS

MRI was most accurate in diagnosing cruciate ligament injuries with a PPV approaching 100%. The PPV of MRI in diagnosing meniscal injuries was approximately 60%. MRI was almost 100% sensitive and specific in diagnosing ACL injuries and 82% sensitive and 100% specific in diagnosing PCL injuries. Conversely, MRI was 77% sensitive and 90% specific in diagnosing MM injuries; and 57% sensitive and 95% specific in diagnosing LM injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI remains the gold standard for diagnosing soft tissue injuries of the knee. However, there is a false positive rate ranging from 6% to 11% for meniscal tears.

Diagnosis of knee injuries: comparison of the physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging with the findings from arthroscopy

Objectives

To ascertain the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and concordance of the physical examination (PE) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in comparison with arthroscopy, in diagnosing knee injuries.

Methods

Prospective study on 72 patients, with evaluation and comparison of PE, MRI and arthroscopic findings, to determine the concordance, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity.

Results

PE showed sensitivity of 75.00%, specificity of 62.50% and accuracy of 69.44% for medial meniscal (MM) lesions, while it showed sensitivity of 47.82%, specificity of 93.87% and accuracy of 79.16% for lateral meniscal (LM) lesions. For anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries, PE showed sensitivity of 88.67%, specificity of 94.73% and accuracy of 90.27%. For MM lesions, MRI showed sensitivity of 92.50%, specificity of 62.50% and accuracy of 69.44%, while for LM injuries, it showed sensitivity of 65.00%, specificity of 88.46% and accuracy of 81.94%. For ACL injuries, MRI showed sensitivity of 86.79%, specificity of 73.68% and accuracy of 83.33%. For ACL injuries, the best concordance was with PE, while for MM and LM lesions, it was with MRI (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Meniscal and ligament injuries can be diagnosed through careful physical examination, while requests for MRI are reserved for complex or doubtful cases. PE and MRI used together have high sensitivity for ACL and MM lesions, while for LM lesions the specificity is higher.

Level of evidence II – Development of diagnostic criteria on consecutive patients (with universally applied reference “gold” standard).

Evaluation and management of traumatic knee injuries in the emergency department

Posttraumatic knee pain is a common presentation in the emergency department (ED). The use of clinical decision rules can rule out reliably fractures of the knee and reduce the unnecessary cost and radiation exposure associated with plain radiographs. If ligamentous or meniscal injury to the knee is suspected, the ED physician should arrange for expedited follow- up with the patient's primary care physician or an orthopedic specialist for consideration of an MRI and further management. Patients presenting after high-energy mechanisms are at risk for occult fracture and vascular injuries. ED providers must consider these injuries in the proper clinical setting.

Diagnostic value of the clinical investigation in acute meniscal tears combined with anterior cruciate ligament injury using arthroscopic findings as golden standard

INTRODUCTION

The main purpose of our study was to evaluate the accuracy of clinical investigation for meniscal tears associated with ACL injuries. We hypothesized that combined ACL injury can decrease the accuracy of clinical examination in acute onset.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and thirty-seven patients with a mean age of 28.5 years (from 12 to 55) were prospectively examined for acute combined ACL and meniscal injuries, between March and November 2012 at our department. For meniscal tears, clinical examination was performed using McMurray test, Apley test and medial and lateral joint line tenderness. The diagnoses of ACL tear were made using Lachman test, jerk test and pivot-shift test, anterior drawer test and KT-2000 side-to-side difference. Each patient was examined using X-ray and MRI. All the patients underwent arthroscopic surgery performed by the same surgeon within 6 weeks after the injury. Finally, using the arthroscopic findings as gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of clinical investigation and MRI were evaluated.

RESULTS

The specificity of clinical investigation was 63.5 and 46.0 % and the sensitivity was 74.4 and 77.3 % for the medial meniscus and the lateral meniscus, respectively. Overall, the accuracy of the clinical investigation was 70.3 % for the MM and 65.5 % for the lateral meniscus. The accuracy of MRI investigation was 76.4 and 69.5 % for medial and lateral meniscus, respectively.

DISCUSSION

In combined acute ACL injury and meniscal tears, we have found a decreased accuracy of the clinical investigation. The remnants of the torn ACL and the synovitis increased the rate of false positives, and it could simulate meniscal tears. However, clinical investigation can provide sufficient information for the treatment decision and MRI can be avoided as a routine diagnostic tool.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective study.

Magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic appearance of the menisci of the knee

The menisci are critical for normal function of the knee, providing shock absorption and load transmission that reduce stress on the articular cartilage. When torn, a meniscus may require surgery to restore function, reduce pain, and eliminate mechanical symptoms. Patterns of meniscal tears include longitudinal and bucket-handle, which are often reparable; and horizontal, radial, vertical flap, horizontal flap, and complex. Root tears are usually radial and occur in the posterior roots. When reviewing magnetic resonance images, one must be aware of normal variants and imaging pitfalls that may simulate pathology.

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee in the community setting

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is routinely used in the diagnosis of sports-related knee injuries.

PURPOSE

To determine the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of MRI compared with clinical evaluation in the diagnosis of meniscal pathology when the MRI facility and the radiologist are not preselected.

METHODS

A total of 288 knee arthroscopies were retrospectively compared. Patients were divided into 3 groups: those who had MRI performed and interpreted at a single institution, MRI performed and interpreted at community facilities, or a clinical evaluation by a senior orthopaedic surgeon.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the diagnosis of medial meniscal pathology at a single institution were 90%, 59%, 76%; in community facilities, 73%, 68%, 70%; and by a clinical evaluation, 93%, 55%, 73%, respectively. For lateral meniscal pathology, the results were as follows: single institution, 75%, 76%, 81%; community facilities, 60%, 88%, 79%; and clinical evaluation, 45%, 90%, 79%, respectively. Sensitivity for medial meniscus was greater than for lateral meniscus, but specificity of diagnosis was better for lateral meniscus by MRI and clinical evaluation. While not statistically significant, there was increased sensitivity in the diagnosis of medial meniscus and lateral meniscus at SIs, but they have less specificity than at community facilities. The number of false-positive diagnoses (ie, no intra-articular pathology) that resulted in surgery was 4 of 288 (1.39%). The overall accuracy for medial meniscus by MRI was 73% vs 73% for clinical evaluation. The overall accuracy for MRI for lateral meniscus was 78% vs 79% for clinical evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Routine MRI may not be more beneficial than clinical evaluation when there is no preselection of MRI facility and interpreting radiologist.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of MRI for diagnosing meniscal pathology should be reserved for those cases where the orthopaedic clinical examination is ambiguous.

History, clinical findings, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopic correlation in meniscal lesions

PURPOSE

The aim of this prospective study was to compare the accuracy of clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) versus arthroscopic findings and to determine the value of an experienced examiner in clinical decision making.

METHODS

A total of 30 patients with a preoperative MRI underwent arthroscopy over a 5-month period. All patients had a clinical examination performed by an experienced knee surgeon, a specialist in general orthopedics, a senior resident, and a fourth-year resident. These examiners recorded and evaluated the results of seven tests: the medial and lateral joint line tenderness test, the McMurray test, the Apley test, the Stienmann I test, the Payr's test, Childress' sign, and the Ege's test. The injury was classified as a meniscal tear if there were two positive tests. Clinical history, physical examination, and MRI findings were compared with the arthroscopic findings. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of these methods of evaluation were then calculated.

RESULTS

Clinical examination performed by an experienced knee surgeon had better specificity (90% vs. 60%), positive predictive value (95% vs. 83%), negative predictive value (90% vs. 86%), and diagnostic accuracy (93% vs. 83%) than MRI for medial meniscal tears. These parameters showed only a marginal difference in lateral meniscal tears. The experienced knee surgeon had better sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy parameters for medial meniscus tears in comparison with the other three examiners.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that clinical examination by an experienced examiner using multiple meniscus tests is sufficient for a diagnosis of a meniscal tear.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

[Diagnostic approaches to acute knee injury in childhood and adolescence. Yesterday and today]

INTRODUCTION

Clinical examination of acute knee injury in childhood is often difficult and therefore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) serves as an additional diagnostic tool. The aim of the present study was to evaluate on the one hand the indications for diagnostic arthroscopy and on the other hand the indications for MRI.

METHODS

Of the children treated between 1990 and 1999, 87 (group 1) underwent arthroscopy after clinical examination. Between 2000 and 2006 (group 2) 83 patients were examined using MRI after clinical examination and 53 were subsequently submitted to arthroscopy.

RESULTS

In group 1 the clinical diagnosis was verified by arthroscopy in 79%. In group 2 the clinical and arthroscopic diagnoses were consistent in 60% of the patients. The MRI diagnosis was correctly recognized for patella dislocation in all cases, for ligament injuries in 83% and for meniscus injuries in 56%. Due to the application of MRI before arthroscopy the fraction of diagnostic arthroscopies could be reduced from 22% to 13%.

CONCLUSION

The number of diagnostic arthroscopies in childhood can be reduced by application of MRI.

MRI accuracy for tears of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus in patients with acute anterior cruciate ligament injury and the clinical relevance of missed tears

OBJECTIVE

The sensitivity of MRI for the detection of tears of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus (PHLM) is lowest compared with that for tears at other meniscal locations, and the presence of simultaneous acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury decreases overall MRI sensitivity for meniscal tears. We rereviewed surgically proven cases of missed meniscal tears in knees with an acute ACL injury to determine why PHLM tears may be missed. We also investigated whether the missed PHLM tears were clinically significant-that is, if these tears required surgical repair or resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 120 patients (< 40 years old) who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction within 6 weeks after MRI to identify MRI-missed meniscal tears. Missed PHLM tears were categorized as clearly evident, occult, or subtle during MRI rereview. The "two-touch-slice" rule served as the primary criterion for tear diagnosis. Secondary MRI findings, including an abnormal superior popliteomeniscal fascicle and apparent far lateral extension of the meniscofemoral ligament, and additional clinical, surgical, and initial MRI findings were compared between meniscal tear groups.

RESULTS

The majority (19/28) of missed tears involved the PHLM: Five were clearly evident at the time of rereview, all of which required surgical treatment; six were occult, none of which was treated; and eight were subtle, four of which were treated. Knees with PHLM tears were more likely to have abnormal superior popliteomeniscal fascicles (p = 0.002) and apparent far lateral extension of the meniscofemoral ligament (p = 0.003) than knees with normal lateral menisci.

CONCLUSION

Clearly evident missed PHLM tears would not have been missed if the two-touch-slice rule had been strictly applied at prospective MRI interpretation. Unavoidably missed PHLM tears were not clinically significant. However, there were no clinical or secondary MRI findings specific to missed PHLM tears in the setting of acute ACL injury.

Accuracy of MRI diagnosis of internal derangement of the knee in a non-specialized tertiary level referral teaching hospital

This study was designed to assess the accuracy of knee MRI examinations carried out in a general tertiary referral hospital without a musculoskeletal fellowship trained radiologist. The study included all patients who had undergone a knee arthroscopy carried out within a 2-year period and who had had a prior MRI knee examination, where both were carried out at this institution. The accuracy of the MRI knee examination was determined by correlation to the arthroscopy report. The accuracy for diagnosis of meniscal and cartilage injuries, in this setting, was found to be similar to a published meta-analysis of previous studies correlating knee MRI and arthroscopy. The overall accuracy of this study was better than the previous similar study. However, the accuracy for diagnosing ACL injuries was lower than in the meta-analysis. The potential reasons for this and other sources of error are discussed.

The value of magnetic resonance imaging in our current management of ACL and meniscal injuries

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is frequently used in the diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and meniscal injuries. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the reliability and value of MRI in our management of ACL and meniscal tears. 138 patients who had undergone a MRI to confirm or refute the clinical diagnosis of an ACL or meniscal tear were identified. Those who had subsequently undergone arthroscopy were selected. MRI findings and clinical diagnosis were compared with those at arthroscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and overall accuracy of clinical diagnosis and MRI were then calculated. The overall accuracy for MRI was 91, 68 and 86% for detecting ACL, medial meniscal and lateral meniscal tears, respectively. Accuracy for clinical diagnosis was 90 and 64% for ACL and meniscal tears, respectively. In contrast to other series, our results indicate a lower accuracy of MRI in detecting pathology, especially of the ACL and medial meniscus. We noted a low sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value but a high negative predictive value rendering MRI most useful as a negative diagnostic tool. We suggest that where symptoms and clinical findings support one of these diagnoses and arthroscopic therapeutic intervention is contemplated, that MRI scanning is not always beneficial. Our current practice of requesting scans to routinely confirm the diagnosis should be altered. Unnecessary MRI scanning increases the financial burden and delays patient treatment.

MRI-negative bucket-handle tears of the lateral meniscus in athletes: a case series

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most widely used non-invasive test for assessing intra-articular injuries of the knee. It has been suggested that a negative MRI can be useful in avoiding the need for diagnostic arthroscopy in cases where clinical examination is equivocal. However, the sensitivity and specificity of MRI is not 100%, particularly for tears of the lateral meniscus. Furthermore, a false negative MRI scan may result in premature return to play in athletes, resulting in increased risk of further damage to a torn meniscus. To illustrate this issue, we present a case series of eight elite athletes who all presented with mechanical knee symptoms and where MRI scans revealed no significant intra-articular pathology. Five of the athletes were allowed to return to sport on the basis of a negative MRI. All patients were subsequently found to have a bucket-handle tear of their lateral meniscus at arthroscopy. Two independent, experienced musculoskeletal radiologists were asked to review the MRI films without being given any clinical history of the cases. Although injuries to the popliteus tendon were noted in two of the athletes who had sustained a recent acute injury to their knee, no meniscal tears were identified. Thus arthroscopy remains the gold standard for the assessment and management of high-demand patients with a clinical suspicion of meniscal pathology.

Accuracy of 3-T MRI Using Fast Spin-Echo Technique to Detect Meniscal Tears of the Knee

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the fast spin-echo technique in detecting meniscal tears of the knee using a 3-T MRI system.

CONCLUSION

We concluded from this study that 3-T MRI using fast spin-echo sequences is highly accurate in the detection of medial and lateral meniscal tears of the knee.

3T MR Imaging of the Musculoskeletal System (Part II): Clinical Applications

The gain in SNR that is afforded by 3T MR imaging systems has tremendous clinical applications in the musculoskeletal system. The potential for demonstrating and enhancing the visibility of normal osseous, tendinous, cartilaginous, and ligamentous structures is exciting. Furthermore, harnessing this added signal to increase spatial resolution may improve our diagnostic abilities in various joints dramatically. Radiologists have enjoyed great success in assessing joint disease with current MR imaging field strengths; however, many intrinsic joint structures remain poorly evaluated, which leads to a golden opportunity for 3T MR imaging. The articular cartilage of the knee, the glenoid labrum of the shoulder, the intrinsic ligaments and TFC of the wrist, the collateral ligaments of the elbow, the labrum and articular cartilage of the hip, and the collateral ligaments of the ankle have been evaluated suboptimally on 1 .5T systems using routine nonarthrographic MR images. Because of the enhanced SNR, the higher spatial resolution, and the greater CNR of intrinsic joint structures at higher field strengths, 3T MR imaging has the potential to improve diagnostic abilities in the musculoskeletal system vastly, which translates into better patient care and management. The author's 2 years of clinical experience with musculoskeletal MR imaging on 3T systems has met and exceeded his expectations, and has bolstered the confidence of his orthopedic surgeons in his diagnoses. As coil technology advances and as the use of parallel imaging becomes more available in the extremities, the author expects to see even more dramatic improvements in image quality.

Cruciate ligament integrity in osteoarthritis of the knee

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate, using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) rupture in knees with symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) compared with those without OA, and the relationship to pain and recalled injury.

METHODS

MRI and plain radiography of the knee were performed in a group of 360 subjects with painful knee OA (cases; 66.7% male, mean age 67.1 years) and 73 without knee pain (controls; 57.5% male, mean age 66.1 years). MRIs were read for the presence or absence of complete or partial ACL or PCL tear. Subjects with knee pain were asked to quantify severity of pain on a visual analog scale and to report whether they could recall a significant knee injury (requiring use of a cane or crutches). We compared the prevalence of ACL and PCL rupture in those with and those without knee pain and also evaluated whether, in cases, there was any association with recalled knee injury.

RESULTS

The proportion of cases who had complete ACL rupture was 22.8%, compared with 2.7% of controls (P = 0.0004). PCL rupture was rare both in cases (0.6%) and in controls (0%). Cases with ACL rupture had more severe radiologic OA (P < 0.0001) and were more likely to have medial joint space narrowing (P < 0.0001) than cases with intact ACLs, but did not have higher pain scores. Among cases, only 47.9% of those with complete ACL tears reported a previous knee injury, compared with 25.9% of those without complete ACL tears (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

ACL rupture is more common among those with symptomatic knee OA compared with those without knee OA. Fewer than half of subjects with ACL rupture recall a knee injury, suggesting that this risk factor for knee OA is underrecognized.