Comparison Of The Magnetic Resonance Imaging And Knee Arthroscopy Findings Of The Menisci And Ligamentous Injuries

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2, 1 - 4, 01.07.2012

İstemi Yücel Hüsamettin Çakıcı Melih Güven Kamil Gürel Kutay Engin Özturan

Öz

Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging is frequently used in the diagnosis of the meniscal andligamentous injuries. The aim of this study is to compare the results of the knee arthroscopyand magnetic resonance imaging findings retrospectively.Methods: Of the sixty-two patients 37 (59.7%) were male and 25 (40.3%) were female. Theaverage age was 36.8 years (range 18-69 years). Patients who had been clinically diagnosedwith meniscal and/or ligamentous injuries and subsequently undergone further magneticresonance imaging examination were included to the study. The left knee was involved in 35(56.5%) and the right knee in 27 (43.5%) cases. Patients had gone to knee arthroscopyaccording to clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging findings, and the resultswere evaluated.Results: 35 (56.4%) of the 62 patients had isolated medial meniscal tear, 11 (17.7%) isolatedlateral meniscal tear and 5 (8%) had isolated complete anterior cruciate ligament injury. 2 (3.2%)had medial meniscal tear and anterior cruciate ligament complete injury, 2 (3.2%) had lateralmeniscal tear and complete anterior cruciate ligament injury and 5 (8%) had medial and lateralmeniscal tear. 2 (3.2%) had medial meniscal tear, anterior and posterior cruciate ligamentcomplete injuries. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of the medial meniscus, lateralmeniscus, anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament revealed sensitivity 95.5%,72.2%, 90.9%, 100%, specificity 76.4%, 93.1%, 88.2%, 98.3%, positive predictive value91.4%, 81.2%, 62.5%, 66.6%, negative predictive value 86.6%, 89.1%, 97.8%, 100%, andaccuracy 90.3%, 87.0%, 88.7%, 98.3% respectively.Conclusion: Magnetic resonance imaging is a safe and appropriate evaluation in the diagnosisof the meniscal and ligament injuries of the knee

Anahtar Kelimeler

Magnetic resonance imaging, arthroscopy, meniscus

Menisküs Ve Bağ Yaralanmalarının Manyetik Rezonans Görüntüleme Ve Artroskopik Cerrahi Bulgularının Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Amaç: Manyetik rezonans görüntüleme dizde menisküs ve bağ yaralanmalarının tanısındasıklıkla kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışmadaki amacımız dizdeki bu tip patolojilerin artroskopisonuçları ile manyetik rezonans görüntüleme verilerinin retrospektif olarak karşılaştırılmasıdır.Yöntem: Travma sonrası klinik olarak menisküs ve/veya bağ yaralanması düşünülen vemanyetik rezonans görüntüleme tetkiki yapılmış 62 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Hastalarınortalama yaşı 36.8 (dağılım 18–69 yaş) idi. Hastaların 37’si (%59.7) erkek iken 25’si (%40.3)kadın idi. 35 (%56.5) sol, 27 (%43.5) sağ dizde yaralanma mevcuttu. Klinik değerlendirmedeve manyetik rezonans görüntülemede patoloji düşünülüp diz artroskopisi yapılmış hastalarınmanyetik rezonans görüntüleme ve artroskopi sonuçları değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Artroskopi sonuçlarına göre 35 (%56.4) hastada izole medial menisküs yırtığı, 11(%17.7) hastada izole lateral menisküs yırtığı, 5 (%8) hastada izole ön çapraz bağ yaralanması,2 (%3.2) hastada medial menisküs yırtığı ve ön çapraz bağ yaralanması, 2 (%3.2) hastada lateralmenisküs yırtığı ve ön çapraz bağ yaralanması, 5 (%8) hastada medial menisküs ve lateralmenisküs yırtığı, 2 (%3.2) hastada medial menisküs, ön çapraz bağ ve arka çapraz bağ yırtığıtespit edildi. Yapılan değerlendirmede manyetik rezonans görüntülemede medial menisküs içinsensitivite %95,5, spesifite %76,4, pozitif prediktif değeri (PPD) %91.4, negatif prediktif değeri(NPD) %86.6, doğruluk oranı %90,3; lateral menisküs için sensitivite %72.2, spesifite %93.1,PPD %81.2, NPD %89,1, doğruluk oranı %87; ön çapraz bağ için sensitivite %90.9, spesifite%88.2, PPD %62.5, NPD %97.8, doğruluk oranı %88.7; arka çapraz bağ için sensitivite %100,spesifite %98.3, PPD %66.6, NPD %100, doğruluk oranı %98.3 olarak tespit edilmiştir.Sonuç: Manyetik rezonans görüntüleme dizde menisküs ve bağ yaralanmalarının tanısındagüvenle kullanılabilecek bir tetkikdir

Anahtar Kelimeler

Manyetik rezonans görüntüleme, artroskopi, menisküs

Kaynakça

• Oberlander MA, Shalvoy RM, Hughston JC. The accuracy of the clinical knee examination documented by arthroscopy. A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 1993;21:773–8.
• Selesnick FH, Noble HB, Bachman DC, Steinberg FL. Internal derangement of the knee: diagnosis by arthrography, arthroscopy, and arthrotomy. Clin Orthop. 1985;198:26–30.
• Lawson GM, Nutton RW. A prospective audit of knee arthroscopy: A study of the accuracy of clinical diagnosis and therapeutic value of 325 knee arthroscopies. JR Coll Surg Edinb. 1995;40:135–7.
• Solomon DH, Simel DL, Bates DW, Katz JN, Schaffer JL. Does this patient have a torn meniscus or ligament of the knee: Value of the physical examination. JAMA. 2001;286:1610– 20.
• Majewski M, Susanne H, Klaus S. Epidemiology of athletic knee injuries: A 10-year study. Knee. 2006;13:184-8.
• Mackenzie R, Palmer CR, Lomas DJ, Dixon AK. Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: Diagnostic performance studies. Clin Radiol. 1996;51:251-7.
• Oei EH, Nikken JJ, Verstijnen AC, Ginai AZ, Myriam Hunink MG. MR imaging of the menisci and cruciate ligaments: a systematic review. Radiology. 2003;226:837-48.
• Rappeport ED, Mehta S, Wieslander SB, Lausten GS, Thomsen HS. MR imaging before arthroscopy in knee joint disorders? Acta Radiol. 1996;37:602-9.
• Fischer SP, Fox JM, Del Pizzo W, Friedman MJ, Snyder SJ, Ferkel RD. Accuracy of diagnoses from magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: a multicenter analysis of one thousand and fourteen patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991;73(1):2– 10.
• Ha TP, Li KC, Beaulieu CF, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament injury: Fast spin-echo MR imaging with arthroscopic correlation in 217 examinations. Am J Roentgenol. 1998;170:1215–9.
• O’Shea KJ, Murphy KP, Heekin RD, Herzwurm PJ. The diagnostic accuracy of history, physical examination, and radiographs in the evaluation of traumatic knee disorders. Am J Sports Med. 1996;24:164–7.
• Weinstabl R, Muellner T, Vecsei V, Kainberger F, Kramer M. Economic considerations for the diagnosis and therapy of meniscal lesions: Can magnetic resonance imaging help reduce the expense? World J Surg. 1997;21:363–8.
• Stoller DW, Martin C, Crues JV, Kaplan L, Mink JH. Meniscal tears: Pathologic correlation with MR imaging. Radiology. 1987;163:731–8.
• Stoller DW, Cannon WD, Lesley JR. Magnetic resonance imaging in orthopedics and sports medicine. The knee in: Stoller D (edi). Philadelphia: J B Lipponcott; 1997:204–5.
• Mackenzie R, Dixon AK, Keene GS, Hollingworth W, Lomas DJ, Villar RN. Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: Assessment of effectiveness. Clin Radiol. 1996;51(4):245–50.
• Miller GK. A prospective study comparing the accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of meniscus tears with magnetic resonance imaging and its effect on clinical outcome. Arthroscopy. 1996;12:406–13.
• Rose NE, Gold SM. A comparison of accuracy between clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of meniscal and anterior cruciate ligament tears. Arthroscopy. 1996;12:398–405.
• Khanda GE, Akhtar W, Ahsan H, Ahmad N. Assessment of menisci and ligamentous injuries of the knee on magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with arthroscopy. J Pak Med Assoc. 2008;58(10):537-40.
• Spiers AS, Meagher T, Ostlere SJ, Wilson DJ, Dodd CA. Can MRI of the knee affect arthroscopic practice? A prospective study of 58 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75(1):49–52.
• Herman LJ, Beltran J. Pitfalls in MR imaging of the knee. Radiology. 1988;167(3):775–81.
• Watanabe AT, Carter BC, Teitelbaum GP, Bradley WG Jr. Common pitfalls in magnetic resonance imaging of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71(6):857–62.
• Quinn SF, Brown TF. Meniscal tears diagnosed with MR imaging versus arthroscopy: how reliable a standard is arthroscopy? Radiology. 1991;181:843–7.
• Ireland J, Trickey EL, Stoker DJ. Arthroscopy and arthrography of the knee: a critical review. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1980;62-B(1):3–6.
• Dandy DJ, Jackson RW. The diagnosis of problems after meniscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1975;57(3):349–52.
• Jackson RW, Abe I. The role of arthroscopy in the management of disorders of the knee. An analysis of 200 consecutive examinations. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972;54(2):310-22.
• Boeve BF, Davidson RA, Staab EV Jr. Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of knee injuries. South Med J. 1991;84(9):1123–7.
• Crawford R, Walley G, Bridgman S, Maffulli N. Magnetic resonance imaging versus arthroscopy in the diagnosis of knee pathology, concentrating on meniscal lesions and ACL tears: A systematic review. Br Med Bull. 2007;84:5–23.
• Bassett LW, Grover JS, Seeger LL. Magnetic resonance imaging of knee trauma. Skeletal Radiol. 190;19(6):401–5.
• Trieshmann HW Jr., Mosure JC. The impact of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee on surgical decision making. Arthroscopy. 1996;12(5):550–5.