Cargando…

A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess a novel ultrasound (US) scanning approach in evaluating knee femoral cartilaginous defects, compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, commonly used for knee imaging) and arthroscopy (gold standard). METHODS: Sixty-four consecutive patients (65 knees) were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cao, Junyan, Zheng, Bowen, Meng, Xiaochun, Lv, Yan, Lu, Huading, Wang, Kun, Huang, Dongmei, Ren, Jie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048893/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0887-x
_version_ 1783340185231032320
author Cao, Junyan
Zheng, Bowen
Meng, Xiaochun
Lv, Yan
Lu, Huading
Wang, Kun
Huang, Dongmei
Ren, Jie
author_facet Cao, Junyan
Zheng, Bowen
Meng, Xiaochun
Lv, Yan
Lu, Huading
Wang, Kun
Huang, Dongmei
Ren, Jie
author_sort Cao, Junyan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess a novel ultrasound (US) scanning approach in evaluating knee femoral cartilaginous defects, compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, commonly used for knee imaging) and arthroscopy (gold standard). METHODS: Sixty-four consecutive patients (65 knees) were prospectively evaluated between April 2010 and July 2011. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity (62.2 and 69.4%), specificity (92.9 and 90.5%), accuracy (75.4 and 78.5%), and adjusted positive (88.7 and 90.4%) and negative predictive (69.5 and 73.3%) were similar for both radiologists (weighted κ = 0.76). Furthermore, agreement between grading by US and MRI was substantial (weighted κ = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the novel US scanning approach allows similar diagnostic performance compared to routine MRI for knee cartilage defects. US is more accessible, easier to perform, and less expensive than MRI, with potential advantages of easier initial screening and assessment of cartilage defects. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-018-0887-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6048893
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60488932018-07-19 A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging Cao, Junyan Zheng, Bowen Meng, Xiaochun Lv, Yan Lu, Huading Wang, Kun Huang, Dongmei Ren, Jie J Orthop Surg Res Research Article BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess a novel ultrasound (US) scanning approach in evaluating knee femoral cartilaginous defects, compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, commonly used for knee imaging) and arthroscopy (gold standard). METHODS: Sixty-four consecutive patients (65 knees) were prospectively evaluated between April 2010 and July 2011. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity (62.2 and 69.4%), specificity (92.9 and 90.5%), accuracy (75.4 and 78.5%), and adjusted positive (88.7 and 90.4%) and negative predictive (69.5 and 73.3%) were similar for both radiologists (weighted κ = 0.76). Furthermore, agreement between grading by US and MRI was substantial (weighted κ = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the novel US scanning approach allows similar diagnostic performance compared to routine MRI for knee cartilage defects. US is more accessible, easier to perform, and less expensive than MRI, with potential advantages of easier initial screening and assessment of cartilage defects. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-018-0887-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6048893/ /pubmed/30012149 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0887-x Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cao, Junyan
Zheng, Bowen
Meng, Xiaochun
Lv, Yan
Lu, Huading
Wang, Kun
Huang, Dongmei
Ren, Jie
A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
title A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
title_full A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
title_fullStr A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
title_full_unstemmed A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
title_short A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
title_sort novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048893/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0887-x
work_keys_str_mv AT caojunyan anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT zhengbowen anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT mengxiaochun anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT lvyan anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT luhuading anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT wangkun anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT huangdongmei anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT renjie anovelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT caojunyan novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT zhengbowen novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT mengxiaochun novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT lvyan novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT luhuading novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT wangkun novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT huangdongmei novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging
AT renjie novelultrasoundscanningapproachforevaluatingfemoralcartilagedefectsofthekneecomparisonwithroutinemagneticresonanceimaging