Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22270676›Full record

ReviewKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2012

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance arthrography and computed tomography for the detection of chondral lesions of the knee.

Toby O Smith, Benjamin T Drew, Andoni P Toms, Simon T Donell, Caroline B Hing

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Research progress in Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for partial thickness cartilage loss in medial compartment of knee joint].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Toby O SmithFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Queen's Building, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK. toby.smith@uea.ac.uk
Benjamin T Drew
Andoni P Toms
Simon T Donell
Caroline B Hing
University of East Anglia · GBFriarage Hospital · GBNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital · GBSt George's Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the diagnostic test accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) and computed tomography arthrography (CTA) for the detection of chondral lesions of the patellofemoral and tibiofemoral joints.

methodsA review of published and unpublished literature sources was conducted on 22nd September 2011. All studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy (sensitivity/specificity) of MRI or MRA or CTA for the assessment of adults with chondral (cartilage) lesions of the knee (tibiofemoral/patellofemoral joints) with surgical comparison (arthroscopic or open) as the reference test were included. Data were analysed through meta-analysis.

resultsTwenty-seven studies assessing 2,592 knees from 2,509 patients were included. The findings indicated that whilst presenting a high specificity (0.95-0.99), the sensitivity of MRA, MRI and CTA ranged from 0.70 to 0.80. MRA was superior to MRI and CTA for the detection of patellofemoral joint chondral lesions and that higher field-strength MRI scanner and grade four lesions were more accurately detected compared with lower field-strength and grade one lesions. There appeared no substantial difference in diagnostic accuracy between the interpretation from musculoskeletal and general radiologists when undertaking an MRI review of tibiofemoral and patellofemoral chondral lesions.

conclusionsSpecialist radiological imaging is specific for cartilage disease in the knee but has poorer sensitivity to determine the therapeutic options in this population. Due to this limitation, there remains little indication to replace the 'gold-standard' arthroscopic investigation with MRI, MRA or CTA for the assessment of adults with chondral lesions of the knee. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Indexed as

AdultArthrographyCartilage, ArticularCartilage DiseasesHumansKnee JointMagnetic Resonance ImagingSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID22270676
OpenAlexW2067546587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.