Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36792853›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2023

Detection of the glenoid bare spot by non-arthrographic MR imaging, conventional MR arthrography, and 3D high-resolution T1-weighted VIBE MR arthrography: comparison with CT arthrography.

Mehmet Ali Ozel, Hayri Ogul, Ali Koksal, Mehmet Kose, Kutsi Tuncer, Suat Eren, Mecit Kantarci

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06707948 (Comparison of Different Treatment Strategies for Root Injury Behind the Medial Meniscus to Delay the Progression of Knee Osteoarthritis), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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.

NCT06707948 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Different Treatment Strategies for Root Injury Behind the Medial Meniscus to Delay the Progression of Knee Osteoarthritis: a Prospective Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorShanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of MedicineRan2024 to 2027Enrolled69ConditionsOsteoarthritis, Meniscus LesionArmsArthroscopic meniscus surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. New imaging techniques and trends in radiology.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2025
    Review
  2. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Mehmet Ali OzelDepartment of Radiology, Medical Faculty, Duzce University, Arapçiftliği MahallesiNumara 10, 2901, Sokak, Duzce, Turkey.
Hayri OgulDepartment of Radiology, Medical Faculty, Duzce University, Arapçiftliği MahallesiNumara 10, 2901, Sokak, Duzce, Turkey. drhogul@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5989-3729
Ali KoksalAnkara Bayindir Private Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Mehmet KoseDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Medical Faculty, Altinbas University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Kutsi TuncerDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Medical Faculty, Altinbas University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Suat ErenDepartment of Radiology, Medical Faculty, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey.
Mecit KantarciDepartment of Radiology, Medical Faculty, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey.
Altınbaş University · TRDüzce Üniversitesi · TRAtatürk University · TRBayındır Hastanesi · TRErzincan Binali Yıldırım University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of non-arthrographic MR imaging, conventional MR arthrography, and 3D T1-weighted volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) MR arthrography sequences as compared with a CT arthrography in the diagnosis of glenoid bare spot.

methodsA retrospective study of 216 patients who underwent non-arthrographic MR imaging, conventional MR arthrography, VIBE MRI arthrography, and CT arthrogram between January 2011 and March 2022 was conducted. The diagnostic accuracy of non-arthrographic MR imaging, direct MR arthrography, and VIBE MRI arthrography in the detection of glenoid bare spot was compared with that of CT arthrography. All studies were reviewed by 2 MSK radiologists. Interobserver agreement for MR imaging and MR arthrographic findings was calculated.

resultsSixteen of 216 patients were excluded. Twenty-three of 200 shoulders had glenoid bare spot on CT arthrographic images. The glenoid bare spot was detected in 11 (47.8%) and 7 (30.4%) patients on conventional non-arthrographic MR images and in 18 (78.3%) and 16 (69.6%) patients on conventional MR arthrograms by observers 1 and 2, respectively. Both observers separately described the bare spot in 22 of 23 patients (95.7%) on 3D volumetric MR arthrograms. Interobserver variabilities were fair agreement for conventional non-arthrographic MR imaging (κ = 0.35, p < 0.05), moderate agreement for conventional MR arthrogram (κ = 0.50, p < 0.05), and near-perfect agreement for 3D volumetric MR arthrogram reading (κ = 0.87, p < 0.05).

conclusionsA 3D high-resolution T1-weighted VIBE MR arthrography sequence may yield diagnostic performance that is comparable with that of CT arthrography in the diagnosis of glenoid bare spot. KEY POINTS: •Glenoid bare spot should not be misdiagnosed as a transchondral defect of the glenoid surface by radiologists. •A 3D high-resolution T1-weighted VIBE MR arthrography sequence may be used as a high-sensitivity imaging technique in the diagnosis of glenoid bare spot.

Indexed as

ArthrographyImaging, Three-DimensionalHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedArthrographyGlenoid cavityMagnetic resonance imagingTomography

Identifiers

PMID36792853
OpenAlexW4320881904

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.