Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28749994›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Ultrasonography versus magnetic resonance imaging in detecting and grading common extensor tendon tear in chronic lateral epicondylitis.

Artur Bachta, Krzysztof Rowicki, Bartłomiej Kisiel, Magdalena Żabicka, Sylwia Elert-Kopeć, Janusz Płomiński, Witold Tłustochowicz, Artur Maliborski

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Sports injuries : What type of imaging is required?]Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  10. MSK Ultrasound - An IJSPT Perspective.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Artur BachtaDepartment of Internal Diseases and Rheumatology, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Krzysztof RowickiDepartment of Orthopedics, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Bartłomiej KisielDepartment of Internal Diseases and Rheumatology, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Magdalena ŻabickaDepartment of Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Sylwia Elert-KopećDepartment of Internal Diseases and Rheumatology, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Janusz PłomińskiDepartment of Orthopedics, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Witold TłustochowiczDepartment of Internal Diseases and Rheumatology, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Artur MaliborskiDepartment of Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, ul. Szaserów 128, Warszawa, Poland.
Wojskowy Instytut Medycyny Lotniczej · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the diagnostic performance and reliability of ultrasonography (US) in detecting and grading common extensor tendon (CET) tear in patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis (LE), using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study comprised fifty-eight chronic LE patients. Each patient underwent US and MRI. CET status was classified as: high-grade tear (≥50% thickness), low-grade tear (<50% thickness), suspected tear (possible but not evident tear), no tear. Additionally, the following dichotomous scale was used: confirmed or unconfirmed CET tear. Relative US parameters (versus MRI) for detecting CET tear included: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy. The agreement between US and MRI findings was measured using the weighted Cohen kappa coefficient (κ).

resultsUS showed moderate agreement with MRI in detecting and grading CET tear (κ = 0.49). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in CET tear detecting by US were 64.52%, 85.19%, and 72.73%, respectively. PPV and NPV of US were 83.33% and 67.65%, respectively. No patient with unconfirmed CET tear on US had high-grade CET tear on MRI.

conclusionUltrasonography is a valuable imaging modality that can be used as a screening tool to exclude high-grade CET tear in chronic LE patients. Once a tear is evident on US, MRI should be considered to assess precisely the extent of tendon injury.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingUltrasonographyAdultAgedChronic DiseaseDemographyFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReference StandardsSensitivity and SpecificityTendon InjuriesTennis Elbow

Identifiers

PMID28749994
PMCPMC5531525
OpenAlexW2739848591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.