ArticleSkeletal radiology2021
Comparison of 2D, 3D, and radially reformatted MR images in the detection of labral tears and acetabular cartilage injury in young patients.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Preoperative MR imaging for hip dysplasia : Assessment of associated deformities and intraarticular pathologies].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- The imaging evaluation of acetabular labral lesions.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the utility of two-dimensional high-resolution (2D), 3-dimensional with multiplanar reconstruction (3D MPR), and radially reformatted (RR) MRIs when evaluating the complexities of the hip joint in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). We hypothesized RR would be superior in detecting labral pathology and 2D would be superior in detecting transition zone and acetabular cartilage injury. MATERIALS AND
methods2D, 3D MPR, and RR MRIs of 33 patients, who later underwent surgical treatment for FAI, were evaluated for sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Bland-Altman methods were used to estimate agreement between each method and the gold-standard, arthroscopic visualization of the hip joint, regarding the percentage of the hip joint affected by each injury type.
results3D MPR and RR groupings were associated with the highest sensitivity and accuracy for labral injury. 3D MPR demonstrated the smallest bias in assessing the percentage of joint affected by labral injury and was the most accurate in identifying acetabular cartilage injury, whereas RR had the smallest mean difference in assessing the percentage of joint affected by acetabular cartilage injury. 2D was the most accurate in identifying transition zone injuries, while RR was superior in assessing the percentage of the joint affected by transition zone injury.
conclusionsOur results suggest that including both 3D MPR and RR MRI groupings is favorable for accurate joint visualization and well-informed treatment planning, especially given that labral injury is a main source of pain and dysfunction for FAI patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.