...
首页> 外文期刊>Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia >Diagnosis of knee injuries: comparison of the physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging with the findings from arthroscopy a??
【24h】

Diagnosis of knee injuries: comparison of the physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging with the findings from arthroscopy a??

机译:膝关节损伤的诊断:体格检查和磁共振成像与关节镜检查结果的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and concordance of the physical examination (PE) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in comparison with arthroscopy, in diagnosing knee injuries. METHODS: Prospective study on 72 patients, with evaluation and comparison of PE, MRI and arthroscopic findings, to determine the concordance, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: PE showed sensitivity of 75.00%, specificity of 62.50% and accuracy of 69.44% for medial meniscal (MM) lesions, while it showed sensitivity of 47.82%, specificity of 93.87% and accuracy of 79.16% for lateral meniscal (LM) lesions. For anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries, PE showed sensitivity of 88.67%, specificity of 94.73% and accuracy of 90.27%. For MM lesions, MRI showed sensitivity of 92.50%, specificity of 62.50% and accuracy of 69.44%, while for LM injuries, it showed sensitivity of 65.00%, specificity of 88.46% and accuracy of 81.94%. For ACL injuries, MRI showed sensitivity of 86.79%, specificity of 73.68% and accuracy of 83.33%. For ACL injuries, the best concordance was with PE, while for MM and LM lesions, it was with MRI ( p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Meniscal and ligament injuries can be diagnosed through careful physical examination, while requests for MRI are reserved for complex or doubtful cases. PE and MRI used together have high sensitivity for ACL and MM lesions, while for LM lesions the specificity is higher. Level of evidence II - Development of diagnostic criteria on consecutive patients (with universally applied reference "gold" standard).
机译:目的:与膝关节镜检查相比,确定体检(PE)和磁共振成像(MRI)的敏感性,特异性,准确性和一致性,以诊断膝关节损伤。方法:对72例患者进行前瞻性研究,并对其PE,MRI和关节镜检查结果进行评估和比较,以确定其一致性,准确性,敏感性和特异性。结果:PE对内侧半月板病变的敏感性为75.00%,特异性为62.50%,准确性为69.44%;对半月板外侧病变的敏感性为47.82%,特异性为93.87%,准确性为79.16%。 。对于前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤,PE的敏感性为88.67%,特异性为94.73%,准确度为90.27%。对于MM病变,MRI的敏感性为92.50%,特异性为62.50%,准确性为69.44%;对于LM损伤,MRI的敏感性为65.00%,特异性为88.46%,准确性为81.94%。对于ACL损伤,MRI显示灵敏度为86.79%,特异性为73.68%,准确度为83.33%。对于ACL损伤,最好的一致性是PE,而对于MM和LM病变,最好是MRI(p <0.001)。结论:可以通过仔细的身体检查来诊断半月板和韧带损伤,而对于复杂或可疑的病例则保留MRI要求。 PE和MRI一起使用对ACL和MM病变具有很高的敏感性,而对于LM病变则具有更高的特异性。证据水平II-制定连续患者的诊断标准(普遍使用参考“金”标准)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号