We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
Scapholunate Interosseous Ligament Tears: Diagnostic Performance of 1.5 T, 3 T MRI, and MR Arthrography-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Academic Radiology 2016 September
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis for evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of 1.5 Tesla and 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA), in the detection of scapholunate interosseous ligament (SLIL) injury.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed (until July 2015) using the PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and conference proceedings. Original studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of MRI or MRA in the detection of SLIL injuries using arthroscopy or open surgery as the reference standard were included.
RESULTS: Of the initial 930 published records and 103 conference proceedings, 24 studies (1902 MRI examinations) were included (median SLIL injury prevalence: 33% [interquartile range: 25-42]). Heterogeneity was detected for 1.5 T MRI (chi-square: 47.93, P < 0.001) but not for 3.0 T MRI (chi-square: 8.00, P value: 0.09) and MRA (chi-square: 14.54, P value: 0.34) studies. The sensitivities of 1.5 T MRI, 3.0 T MRI, and MRA for detection of SLIL injury were 45.7% (95% confidence interval: 40.1-51.4), 75.7% (66.8-83.2), and 82.1% (76.1-87.2), respectively. The specificities of 1.5 T MRI, 3.0 T MRI, and MRA for detection of SLIL injury were 80.5% (77.3-83.4), 97.1% (89.8-99.6), and 92.8% (90.2-94.9), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratios of 1.5 T MRI, 3.0 T MRI, and MRA for detection of SLIL injury were 5.56 (2.71-11.39), 23.23 (3.16-171.00), and 65.04 (32.89-128.62) (P value < 0.001), respectively. The results were consistent after addressing publication bias and sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: MRA is superior to 3.0 T MRI, and 3.0 T MRI is superior to 1.5 T MRI in terms of diagnostic performance. 3.0 T MRI has the highest specificity for the detection of SLIL injuries.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed (until July 2015) using the PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and conference proceedings. Original studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of MRI or MRA in the detection of SLIL injuries using arthroscopy or open surgery as the reference standard were included.
RESULTS: Of the initial 930 published records and 103 conference proceedings, 24 studies (1902 MRI examinations) were included (median SLIL injury prevalence: 33% [interquartile range: 25-42]). Heterogeneity was detected for 1.5 T MRI (chi-square: 47.93, P < 0.001) but not for 3.0 T MRI (chi-square: 8.00, P value: 0.09) and MRA (chi-square: 14.54, P value: 0.34) studies. The sensitivities of 1.5 T MRI, 3.0 T MRI, and MRA for detection of SLIL injury were 45.7% (95% confidence interval: 40.1-51.4), 75.7% (66.8-83.2), and 82.1% (76.1-87.2), respectively. The specificities of 1.5 T MRI, 3.0 T MRI, and MRA for detection of SLIL injury were 80.5% (77.3-83.4), 97.1% (89.8-99.6), and 92.8% (90.2-94.9), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratios of 1.5 T MRI, 3.0 T MRI, and MRA for detection of SLIL injury were 5.56 (2.71-11.39), 23.23 (3.16-171.00), and 65.04 (32.89-128.62) (P value < 0.001), respectively. The results were consistent after addressing publication bias and sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: MRA is superior to 3.0 T MRI, and 3.0 T MRI is superior to 1.5 T MRI in terms of diagnostic performance. 3.0 T MRI has the highest specificity for the detection of SLIL injuries.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app