Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2014; 27(04): 319-324
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1367731
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

MRI versus Ultrasonography to Assess Meniscal Abnormalities in Acute Knees

James L. Cook
1   Comparative Orthopaedic Laboratory, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
2   Missouri Orthopaedic Institute, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
,
Cristi R. Cook
1   Comparative Orthopaedic Laboratory, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
,
James P. Stannard
2   Missouri Orthopaedic Institute, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
,
Gavin Vaughn
3   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Appalachian Regional Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Center, Boone, North Carolina
,
Nichole Wilson
2   Missouri Orthopaedic Institute, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
,
Brandon L. Roller
4   Arthrex Inc. Naples, Florida
,
Aaron M. Stoker
1   Comparative Orthopaedic Laboratory, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
,
Prakash Jayabalan
5   Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
,
Moses Hdeib
6   Department of Diagnostic Medical Ultrasound, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
,
Keiichi Kuroki
1   Comparative Orthopaedic Laboratory, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

11 December 2013

18 December 2013

Publication Date:
28 January 2014 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is often considered the “gold standard” diagnostic imaging modality for detection of meniscal abnormalities, it is associated with misdiagnosis in as high as 47% of cases, is costly, and is not readily available to a large number of patients. Ultrasonographic examination of the knee has been reported to be an effective diagnostic tool for this purpose with the potential to overcome many of the shortcomings of MRI. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical usefulness of ultrasonography for diagnosis of meniscal pathology in patients with acute knee pain and compare its diagnostic accuracy to MRI in a clinical setting. With Institutional Review Board approval, patients (n = 71) with acute knee pain were prospectively enrolled with informed consent. Preoperative MRI (1.5 T) was performed on each affected knee using the hospital's standard equipment and protocols and read by faculty radiologists trained in musculoskeletal MRI. Ultrasonographic assessments of each affected knee were performed by one of two faculty members trained in musculoskeletal ultrasonography using a 10 to 14 MHz linear transducer. Arthroscopic evaluation of affected knees was performed by one of three faculty orthopedic surgeons to assess and record all joint pathology, which served as the reference standard for determining presence, type, and severity of meniscal pathology. All evaluators for each diagnostic modality were blinded to all other data. Data were collected and compared by a separate investigator to determine sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), correct classification rate (CCR), likelihood ratios (LR[+] and LR[−]), and odds ratios. Preoperative ultrasonographic assessment of meniscal pathology was associated with Sn = 91.2%, Sp = 84.2%, PPV = 94.5%, NPV = 76.2%, CCR = 89.5%, LR(+) = 5.78, and LR(−) = 0.10. Preoperative MRI assessment of meniscal pathology was associated with Sn = 91.7%, Sp = 66.7%, PPV = 84.6%, NPV = 80.0%, CCR = 81.1%, LR(+) = 2.75, and LR(−) = 0.13. Ultrasonography was two times more likely than MRI to correctly determine presence or absence of meniscal pathology seen arthroscopically in this study. Ultrasonography is a useful tool for diagnosis of meniscal pathology with potential advantages over MRI. Based on these data and available portable equipment, ultrasonography could be considered for use as a point-of-injury diagnostic modality for meniscal injuries.

Keywords

ultrasonography - magnetic resonance imaging - meniscus - knee - arthroscopy
 

  • References

  • 1 Medical Data International; Newport Beach, CA; September 2003
    PubMed
  • 2 Alizadeh A, Babaei Jandaghi A, Keshavarz Zirak A, Karimi A, Mardani-Kivi M, Rajabzadeh A. Knee sonography as a diagnostic test for medial meniscal tears in young patients. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2013; 23 (8) 927-931
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Azzoni R, Cabitza P. Is there a role for sonography in the diagnosis of tears of the knee menisci?. J Clin Ultrasound 2002; 30 (8) 472-476
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Casser HR, Sohn C, Kiekenbeck A. Current evaluation of sonography of the meniscus. Results of a comparative study of sonographic and arthroscopic findings. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1990; 109 (3) 150-154
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Court-Payen M. Sonography of the knee: intra-articular pathology. J Clin Ultrasound 2004; 32 (9) 481-490
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 De Maeseneer M, Lenchik L, Starok M, Pedowitz R, Trudell D, Resnick D. Normal and abnormal medial meniscocapsular structures: MR imaging and sonography in cadavers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 171 (4) 969-976
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Esmaili Jah AA, Keyhani S, Zarei R, Moghaddam AK. Accuracy of MRI in comparison with clinical and arthroscopic findings in ligamentous and meniscal injuries of the knee. Acta Orthop Belg 2005; 71 (2) 189-196
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Friedl W, Glaser F. Dynamic sonography in the diagnosis of ligament and meniscal injuries of the knee. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1991; 110 (3) 132-138
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Grifka J, Richter J, Gumtau M. [Clinical and sonographic meniscus diagnosis]. Orthopade 1994; 23 (2) 102-111
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Harper KW, Helms CA, Lambert III HS, Higgins LD. Radial meniscal tears: significance, incidence, and MR appearance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185 (6) 1429-1434
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Karachalios T, Hantes M, Zibis AH, Zachos V, Karantanas AH, Malizos KN. Diagnostic accuracy of a new clinical test (the Thessaly test) for early detection of meniscal tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (5) 955-962
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Khan Z, Faruqui Z, Ogyunbiyi O, Rosset G, Iqbal J. Ultrasound assessment of internal derangement of the knee. Acta Orthop Belg 2006; 72 (1) 72-76
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Kornaat PR, Bloem JL, Ceulemans RY , et al. Osteoarthritis of the knee: association between clinical features and MR imaging findings. Radiology 2006; 239 (3) 811-817
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Laoruengthana A, Jarusriwanna A. Sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging for knee injury and clinical application for the Naresuan University Hospital. J Med Assoc Thai 2012; 95 (Suppl. 10) S151-S157
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Lee D, Bouffard JA. Ultrasound of the knee. Eur J Ultrasound 2001; 14 (1) 57-71
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Mattli J, Holzach P, Soklic P. [Meniscus ultrasound—a reliable way for diagnosis of meniscus lesions?]. Z Unfallchir Versicherungsmed 1993; 1 (Suppl. 01) 133-140
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Najafi J, Bagheri S, Lahiji FA. The value of sonography with micro convex probes in diagnosing meniscal tears compared with arthroscopy. J Ultrasound Med 2006; 25 (5) 593-597
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Petersen LJ, Rasmussen OS. [Ultrasonography as a diagnostic method in suspected meniscal lesion of the knee. A prospective single blind study of 52 patients]. Ugeskr Laeger 1999; 161 (41) 5679-5682
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Richter J, Grifka J, Fisseler-Eckhoff A, Müller KM, Krämer J. [Ultrasound morphologic criteria in evaluating meniscus changes—an experimental study]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1996; 134 (2) 137-143
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Riedl S, Tauscher A, Kühner C, Göhring U, Sohn C, Meeder PJ. [3-dimensional ultrasound in clinical diagnosis of meniscus lesions]. Ultraschall Med 1998; 19 (1) 28-33
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Vaz CE, Camargo OP, Santana PJ, Valezi AC. Accuracy of magnetic resonance in identifying traumatic intraarticular knee lesions. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2005; 60 (6) 445-450
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Ververidis AN, Verettas DA, Kazakos KJ, Tilkeridis CE, Chatzipapas CN. Meniscal bucket handle tears: a retrospective study of arthroscopy and the relation to MRI. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2006; 14 (4) 343-349
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Mahn MM, Cook JL, Cook CR, Balke MT. Arthroscopic verification of ultrasonographic diagnosis of meniscal pathology in dogs. Vet Surg 2005; 34 (4) 318-323
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Garrick JG, Requa RK. Injuries in high school sports. Pediatrics 1978; 61 (3) 465-469
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Maffulli N, Chan KM, Miao M, Fu FH, Kurosaka M. Athletic knee injuries. Similarities and differences between Asian and Western experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; 323 (323) 98-105
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Saal JA. Common American football injuries. Sports Med 1991; 12 (2) 132-147
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 DeLee JC, Farney WC. Incidence of injury in Texas high school football. Am J Sports Med 1992; 20 (5) 575-580
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Brophy RH, Barnes R, Rodeo SA, Warren RF. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders at the NFL Combine—trends from 1987 to 2000. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007; 39 (1) 22-27
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar