ArticleActa radiologica open2021
MR arthrography of the shoulder; correlation with arthroscopy.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Significance of the Aponeurotic Expansion of the Supraspinatus Tendon in Rotator Cuff Ruptures: An MR Arthrographic Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Sensitivity and Specificity of MRa and MRI Compared to Diagnostic Arthroscopy in Pediatric and Young Adult Shoulder Stabilization Surgery.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- The diagnostic value of MRI segmentation technique for shoulder joint injuries based on deep learning.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Glenohumeral capsular injury rate in patients with glenohumeral instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShoulder dislocation is a common injury, particularly in the younger population. Common long-term sequelae include pain, recurrence, and shoulder arthritis. Immediate and correct diagnosis following shoulder dislocation is key to achieving optimum outcomes. Although magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) is frequently used for diagnosing shoulder instabilities, arthroscopy is still considered the gold standard. PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the diagnostic value of arthroscopy and MRA of the shoulder joint. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study estimates the sensitivity and specificity of MRA of the shoulder. Data from patients who had undergone shoulder MRA and subsequent arthroscopy during a 5-year period were retrospectively collected. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using the arthroscopic findings as the gold standard. Moreover, diagnostic accuracy was estimated using McNemar's test.
resultsIn total, 205 cases were included from which 372 pathological findings were uncovered during the arthroscopic procedures as opposed to 360 findings diagnosed from the MRA images. The glenoid labral tear was the most common finding reported by MRA and arthroscopy. For the detection of glenoid labral tears on MRA, the sensitivity was 0.955 but with eight missed lesions; the specificity was 0.679. Capsular tears, rotator cuff tears, and cartilage lesions proved the most difficult to correctly diagnose using MRA with sensitivities of 0.2, 0.346, and 0.366, respectively.
conclusionsWith a sensitivity of 95%, MRA is a valuable diagnostic tool for assessing shoulder instabilities, particularly when diagnosing labral lesions, including bony and soft-tissue Bankart lesions. Sensitivities and specificities for other glenohumeral lesions are less convincing, however.
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.