HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by de Jesus, J. O. Articles by Nazarian, L. N. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by de Jesus, J. O. Articles by Nazarian, L. N. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Accuracy of MRI, MR Arthrography, and Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Rotator Cuff Tears: A Meta-Analysis

¹ All authors: Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Rm. 763-E, Main Bldg., 132 S 10th St., Philadelphia, PA 19107-5244.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of MRI, MR arthrography, and ultrasound for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears through a meta-analysis of the studies in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Articles reporting the sensitivities and specificities of MRI, MR arthrography, or ultrasound for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears were identified. Surgical (open and arthroscopic) reference standard was an inclusion criterion. Summary statistics were generated using pooled data. Scatterplots of the data sets were plotted on a graph of sensitivity versus (1 – specificity). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated.

RESULTS. Sixty-five articles met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. In diagnosing a full-thickness tear or a partial-thickness rotator cuff tear, MR arthrography is more sensitive and specific than either MRI or ultrasound (p < 0.05). There are no significant differences in either sensitivity or specificity between MRI and ultrasound in the diagnosis of partial- or full-thickness rotator cuff tears (p > 0.05). Summary ROC curves for MR arthrography, MRI, and ultrasound for all tears show the area under the ROC curve is greatest for MR arthrography (0.935), followed by ultrasound (0.889) and then MRI (0.878); however, pairwise comparisons of these curves show no significant differences between MRI and ultrasound (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION. MR arthrography is the most sensitive and specific technique for diagnosing both full- and partial-thickness rotator cuff tears. Ultrasound and MRI are comparable in both sensitivity and specificity.

Keywords: MR arthrography • MRI • rotator cuff tear • shoulder • sports medicine • ultrasound

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?