Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30012149›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2018

A novel ultrasound scanning approach for evaluating femoral cartilage defects of the knee: comparison with routine magnetic resonance imaging.

Junyan Cao, Bowen Zheng, Xiaochun Meng, Yan Lv, Huading Lu, Kun Wang, Dongmei Huang, Jie Ren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Junyan CaoDepartment of Medical Ultrasonics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Bowen ZhengDepartment of Medical Ultrasonics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Xiaochun MengDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Yan LvDepartment of Medical Ultrasonics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Huading LuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Kun WangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Dongmei HuangDepartment of Medical Ultrasonics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China.
Jie RenDepartment of Medical Ultrasonics, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 600 Tianhe Road, Guangzhou, 510630, People's Republic of China. renjieguangzhou@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to assess a novel ultrasound (US) scanning approach in evaluating knee femoral cartilaginous defects, compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, commonly used for knee imaging) and arthroscopy (gold standard).

methodsSixty-four consecutive patients (65 knees) were prospectively evaluated between April 2010 and July 2011.

resultsThe overall sensitivity (62.2 and 69.4%), specificity (92.9 and 90.5%), accuracy (75.4 and 78.5%), and adjusted positive (88.7 and 90.4%) and negative predictive (69.5 and 73.3%) were similar for both radiologists (weighted κ = 0.76). Furthermore, agreement between grading by US and MRI was substantial (weighted κ = 0.61).

conclusionsIn conclusion, the novel US scanning approach allows similar diagnostic performance compared to routine MRI for knee cartilage defects. US is more accessible, easier to perform, and less expensive than MRI, with potential advantages of easier initial screening and assessment of cartilage defects.

Indexed as

Cartilage, ArticularCartilage DiseasesKnee JointArthroscopyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityArthroscopyCartilage diseaseDiagnostic performanceMagnetic resonance imagingSensitivitySpecificityUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID30012149
PMCPMC6048893

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.