Cargando…

3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence on the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for detecting acetabular labral tears (ALT). METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until February 5, 2021, to identify original research studies repor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Peng, Li, Chunbao, Wang, Wenliang, Zhang, Baiqing, Miao, Weicheng, Liu, Yujie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8886969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35232459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-022-02981-1
_version_ 1784660799988432896
author Zhang, Peng
Li, Chunbao
Wang, Wenliang
Zhang, Baiqing
Miao, Weicheng
Liu, Yujie
author_facet Zhang, Peng
Li, Chunbao
Wang, Wenliang
Zhang, Baiqing
Miao, Weicheng
Liu, Yujie
author_sort Zhang, Peng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence on the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for detecting acetabular labral tears (ALT). METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until February 5, 2021, to identify original research studies reporting the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for the detection of ALT. Study methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. The summary sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of the studies were estimated using a bivariate model. We calculated the post-test probability to assess the clinical utility of MRI/MRA. Univariate meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to assess between-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: We included 22 studies (n = 1670 patients). The meta-analytic summary Se and Sp for MRI were 0.8 (95% CI 0.51–0.94) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.68–0.84), respectively, while for MRA they were 0.89 (95% CI 0.82–0.93) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.56–0.80). MRA showed a higher area under the summary receiver operating curve (SROC) (0.87 vs. 0.80) than MRI. MRI could increase the post-test probability to 0.78 and could decrease the post-test probability to 0.21, MRA could increase the post-test probability to 0.74 and could decrease the post-test probability to 0.14. Meta-regression analysis showed two significant factors affecting study heterogeneity: MR field strength and reference standard. After dividing the studies into two subgroups based on the MR field strength, we found that the Se values of 3.0 T MRI were very close to MRA (0.87 vs. 0.89), the Sp values of 3.0 T MRI were superior to MRA (0.77 vs. 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Given that 3.0 T MRI could provide a non-invasive, fast and convenient method to recognize suspicious ALT cases, 3.0 T MRI is more recommended than MRA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8886969
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88869692022-03-17 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy Zhang, Peng Li, Chunbao Wang, Wenliang Zhang, Baiqing Miao, Weicheng Liu, Yujie J Orthop Surg Res Systematic Review BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence on the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for detecting acetabular labral tears (ALT). METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until February 5, 2021, to identify original research studies reporting the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for the detection of ALT. Study methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. The summary sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of the studies were estimated using a bivariate model. We calculated the post-test probability to assess the clinical utility of MRI/MRA. Univariate meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to assess between-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: We included 22 studies (n = 1670 patients). The meta-analytic summary Se and Sp for MRI were 0.8 (95% CI 0.51–0.94) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.68–0.84), respectively, while for MRA they were 0.89 (95% CI 0.82–0.93) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.56–0.80). MRA showed a higher area under the summary receiver operating curve (SROC) (0.87 vs. 0.80) than MRI. MRI could increase the post-test probability to 0.78 and could decrease the post-test probability to 0.21, MRA could increase the post-test probability to 0.74 and could decrease the post-test probability to 0.14. Meta-regression analysis showed two significant factors affecting study heterogeneity: MR field strength and reference standard. After dividing the studies into two subgroups based on the MR field strength, we found that the Se values of 3.0 T MRI were very close to MRA (0.87 vs. 0.89), the Sp values of 3.0 T MRI were superior to MRA (0.77 vs. 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Given that 3.0 T MRI could provide a non-invasive, fast and convenient method to recognize suspicious ALT cases, 3.0 T MRI is more recommended than MRA. BioMed Central 2022-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8886969/ /pubmed/35232459 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-022-02981-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Zhang, Peng
Li, Chunbao
Wang, Wenliang
Zhang, Baiqing
Miao, Weicheng
Liu, Yujie
3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
title 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
title_full 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
title_fullStr 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
title_full_unstemmed 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
title_short 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
title_sort 3.0 t mri is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than mr arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8886969/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35232459
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-022-02981-1
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangpeng 30tmriismorerecommendedtodetectacetabularlabraltearsthanmrarthrographyanupdatedmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT lichunbao 30tmriismorerecommendedtodetectacetabularlabraltearsthanmrarthrographyanupdatedmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT wangwenliang 30tmriismorerecommendedtodetectacetabularlabraltearsthanmrarthrographyanupdatedmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT zhangbaiqing 30tmriismorerecommendedtodetectacetabularlabraltearsthanmrarthrographyanupdatedmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT miaoweicheng 30tmriismorerecommendedtodetectacetabularlabraltearsthanmrarthrographyanupdatedmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy
AT liuyujie 30tmriismorerecommendedtodetectacetabularlabraltearsthanmrarthrographyanupdatedmetaanalysisofdiagnosticaccuracy