ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Deep learning to detect anterior cruciate ligament tear on knee MRI: multi-continental external validation.
Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence demonstrates comparable diagnostic accuracy to radiologists for anterior cruciate ligament tears on MRI: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Pooled it
- AI demonstrates comparable diagnostic performance to radiologists in MRI detection of anterior cruciate ligament tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Performance of artificial intelligence in automated measurement of patellofemoral joint parameters: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- MRI deep learning models for assisted diagnosis of knee pathologies: a systematic review.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- In Vivo Classification of Patellar Motion Trajectories in Individuals: A 4D-CT-Based Study with Unsupervised Clustering.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear Diagnosis: A Bibliometric Analysis of the 50 Most Cited Studies.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2026Review
- Comprehensive deep learning-assisted multi-condition analysis of knee MRI studies improves resident radiologist performance.European radiology · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Musculoskeletal Radiology: Bridging Innovation and Clinical Application.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026Review
- Who Is the Surgeon Now: Human Hands or Machine Minds? Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedics from Diagnosis to Follow-Up-A Structured Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The maximum 2D diameter column of the notch as the most important bone risk indicator compared with the posterior tibial slopes for ACL injury based on computed tomography: Analysis using machine learning approach.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Article
- Review
- Development of a multi-task deep learning system for classification of nine common knee abnormalities on MRI: a large-scale, multicentre, stepwise validation study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Musculoskeletal Imaging.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- Machine learning models for clinical and structural knee osteoarthritis prediction: Recent advancements and future directions.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2025Article
- AI for Lesion Detection in Musculoskeletal Radiology.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2025Review
- [Current Landscape and Commercialization of AI Models in Musculoskeletal Imaging].Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in orthopedics: fundamentals, current applications, and future perspectives.Military Medical Research · 2025Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging of cruciate ligament disorders: current updates.EFORT open reviews · 2025Review
- A comparative analysis of sagittal, coronal, and axial magnetic resonance imaging planes in diagnosing anterior cruciate ligament and meniscal tears via a deep learning model: emphasizing the unexpected importance of the axial plane.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a deep-learning algorithm for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear detection and to compare its accuracy using two external datasets.
methodsA database of 19,765 knee MRI scans (17,738 patients) issued from different manufacturers and magnetic fields was used to build a deep learning-based ACL tear detector. Fifteen percent showed partial or complete ACL rupture. Coronal and sagittal fat-suppressed proton density or T2-weighted sequences were used. A Natural Language Processing algorithm was used to automatically label reports associated with each MRI exam. We compared the accuracy of our model on two publicly available external datasets: MRNet, Bien et al, USA (PLoS Med 15:e1002699, 2018); and KneeMRI, Stajduhar et al, Croatia (Comput Methods Prog Biomed 140:151-164, 2017). Receptor operating characteristics (ROC) curves, area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used to evaluate our model.
resultsOur neural networks achieved an AUC value of 0.939 for detection of ACL tears, with a sensitivity of 87% (0.875) and a specificity of 91% (0.908). After retraining our model on Bien dataset and Stajduhar dataset, our algorithm achieved AUC of 0.962 (95% CI 0.930-0.988) and 0.922 (95% CI 0.875, 0.962) respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were respectively 85% (95% CI 75-94%, 0.852), 89% (95% CI 82-97%, 0.894), 0.875 (95% CI 0.817-0.933) for Bien dataset, and 68% (95% CI 54-81%, 0.681), 93% (95% CI 89-97%, 0.934), and 0.870 (95% CI 0.821-0.913) for Stajduhar dataset.
conclusionOur algorithm showed high performance in the detection of ACL tears with AUC on two external datasets, demonstrating its generalizability on different manufacturers and populations. This study shows the performance of an algorithm for detecting anterior cruciate ligament tears with an external validation on populations from countries and continents different from the study population. KEY POINTS: • An algorithm for detecting anterior cruciate ligament ruptures was built from a large dataset of nearly 20,000 MRI with AUC values of 0.939, sensitivity of 87%, and specificity of 91%. • This algorithm was tested on two external populations from different other countries: a dataset from an American population and a dataset from a Croatian population. Performance remains high on these two external validation populations (AUC of 0.962 and 0.922 respectively).
Indexed as
Identifiers
35726103What 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.