Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21730207›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of sports medicine2011

The clinical utility and diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging for identification of early and advanced knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review.

Carmen E Quatman, Carolyn M Hettrich, Laura C Schmitt, Kurt P Spindler

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of sports medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. MRI T2 Mapping of Knee Articular Cartilage Using Different Acquisition Sequences and Calculation Methods at 1.5 Tesla.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Carmen E QuatmanSports Health and Performance Institute and Department of Orthopaedics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. Carmen.quatman@gmail.com
Carolyn M Hettrich
Laura C Schmitt
Kurt P Spindler

Funding

Prognosis and Predictors of ACL Reconstruction: A Multicenter Cohort StudyR01AR053684 · NIAMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI SPINDLER, KURT PAUL · 2006 to 2020
$8.3M
Multi-faceted Approach to Modeling ACL Injury MechanismsR01AR056259 · NIAMS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI HEWETT, TIMOTHY E · 2009 to 2017
$4.9M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR053684NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR056259
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent diagnostic strategies for detection of structural articular cartilage abnormalities, the earliest structural signs of osteoarthritis, often do not capture the condition until it is too far advanced for the most potential benefit of noninvasive interventions. PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature relative to the following questions: (1) Is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) a valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable instrument to identify knee articular cartilage abnormalities compared with arthroscopy? (2) Is MRI a sensitive tool that can be utilized to identify early cartilage degeneration? STUDY

designSystematic review.

methodsA systematic search was performed in November 2010 using PubMed MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), SPORTDiscus (from 1985), SCOPUS (from 1996), and EMBASE (from 1974) databases.

resultsFourteen level I and 13 level II studies were identified that met inclusion criteria and provided information related to diagnostic performance of MRI compared with arthroscopic evaluation. The diagnostic performance of MRI demonstrated a large range of sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies. The sensitivity for identifying articular cartilage abnormalities in the knee joint was reported between 26% and 96%. Specificity and accuracy were reported between 50% and 100% and between 49% and 94%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for identifying early osteoarthritis were reported between 0% and 86%, 48% and 95%, and 5% and 94%, respectively. As a result of inconsistencies between imaging techniques and methodological shortcomings of many of the studies, a meta-analysis was not performed, and it was difficult to fully synthesize the information to state firm conclusions about the diagnostic performance of MRI.

conclusionThere is evidence in some MRI protocols that MRI is a relatively valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable clinical tool for identifying articular cartilage degeneration. Because of heterogeneity of MRI sequences, it is not possible to make definitive conclusions regarding its global clinical utility for guiding diagnosis and treatment strategies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Traumatic sports injuries to the knee may be significant precursor events to early onset of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Magnetic resonance imaging may aid in early identification of structural injuries to articular cartilage as evidenced by articular cartilage degeneration grading.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingCartilage DiseasesHumansOsteoarthritis, KneeReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID21730207
PMCPMC3782308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.