2000•Orthopedics & TraumatologyOpen access

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Diagnosis of Meniscus and Cruciate Injuries.

Akihiko Hamasaki, K Yasuda, Tsukasa Yamaguchi

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

We examined 83 patients who had undergone both MRI and arthroscopy. The respective sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of MRI of the knee were 94.6%, 76.1%, and 85.5% for medial meniscal tears, 80.0%, 82.8%, and 84.3% for lateral meniscal tears, 100%, 97.1%, and 97.6% for anterior cruciate ligament injuries, and 100%, 98.7%, and 98.8% for posterior cruciate ligament injuries. The reasons for inconsistencies between MRI and arthroscopic findings were suggested as follows; 1) a time lag between MRI and arthroscopy, 2) possibilites of lateral meniscal injuries in lateral infrapatellar approach, 3) variability of meniscal tears near the capsule, 4) difficulty of diagnosis of lateral meniscal tears at the posterior forms near the hiatus popliteus tendon.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We examined 83 patients who had undergone both MRI and arthroscopy. The respective sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of MRI of the knee were 94.6%, 76.1%, and 85.5% for medial meniscal tears, 80.0%, 82.8%, and 84.3% for lateral meniscal tears, 100%, 97.1%, and 97.6% for anterior cruciate ligament injuries, and 100%, 98.7%, and 98.8% for posterior cruciate ligament injuries. The reasons for inconsistencies between MRI and arthroscopic findings were suggested as follows; 1) a time lag between MRI and arthroscopy, 2) possibilites of lateral meniscal injuries in lateral infrapatellar approach, 3) variability of meniscal tears near the capsule, 4) difficulty of diagnosis of lateral meniscal tears at the posterior forms near the hiatus popliteus tendon.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We examined 83 patients who had undergone both MRI and arthroscopy. The respective sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of MRI of the knee were 94.6%, 76.1%, and 85.5% for medial meniscal tears, 80.0%, 82.8%, and 84.3% for lateral meniscal tears, 100%, 97.1%, and 97.6% for anterior cruciate ligament injuries, and 100%, 98.7%, and 98.8% for posterior cruciate ligament injuries. The reasons for inconsistencies between MRI and arthroscopic findings were suggested as follows; 1) a time lag between MRI and arthroscopy, 2) possibilites of lateral meniscal injuries in lateral infrapatellar approach, 3) variability of meniscal tears near the capsule, 4) difficulty of diagnosis of lateral meniscal tears at the posterior forms near the hiatus popliteus tendon.

Key concepts: Medicine, Magnetic resonance imaging, Arthroscopy, Tears, Posterior cruciate ligament, Lateral meniscus, Medial meniscus, Anterior cruciate ligament

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Diagnosis of Meniscus and Cruciate Injuries. — Research Paper | ScholarLens