Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38333443›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Comparison of the Glenoid Index by Computed Tomography With Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Nida A Ahmed, Kailash Narendran, Nishath A Ahmed, Prashanth A, B Holebasu, Mihit Kalawatia, Kunal Dudeja, Parijat Kamble, Roshan Prasad, Gaurav Mittal and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors at 10 institutions in 5 countries.

Nida A AhmedTrauma and Orthopaedics, Barnsley Hospital NHS foundation Trust, Barnsley, GBR.
Kailash NarendranInternal Medicine, Manipal Hospital, Bangalore, IND.
Nishath A AhmedPediatrics, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Medical College and Research Institute, Bangalore, IND.
Prashanth APhysiology, Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha, IND.
B HolebasuRadiodiagnosis, Gadag Institute of Medical Sciences, Gadag, IND.
Mihit KalawatiaMedicine, Rajarshee Chatrapati Shahu Maharaj, Kolhapur, IND.
Kunal DudejaPhysiology, Maharjah's Institute of Medical Sciences, Nellimarla, IND.
Parijat KambleGeneral Medicine, Terna Medical College, Mumbai, IND.
Roshan PrasadMedicine and Surgery, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, IND.
Gaurav MittalResearch and Development, Rotract Club Of Indian Medicos, Mumbai, IND.
Ravi SangoiInternal Medicine, Punyashlok Ahilyadevi Holkar Government Medical College and General Hospital, Baramati, IND.
Barnsley Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBClinical Research Organization · BDGazi Hastanesi · TRInstitute of Medical Sciences · INJawaharlal Nehru Medical College · INMahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences · INManipal Hospital · INRajarshee Chhatrapati Shahu Maharaj Government Medical College and CPR Hospital Kolhapur · INSir Sayajirao General Hospital Medical College · INTerna Dental College and Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Anterior shoulder instability results in labral and osseous glenoid injuries. With a large osseous defect, there is a risk of recurrent dislocation of the joint, and therefore the patient has to undergo surgical correction. An MRI evaluation of the patient helps to assess the soft tissue injury. Currently, the volumetric three-dimensional (3D) reconstructed CT image is the standard for measuring glenoid bone loss and the glenoid index. However, it has the disadvantage of exposing the patient to radiation and additional expenses. This study aims to compare the values of the glenoid index using MRI and CT. Methodology The present study was a two-year cross-sectional study of patients with shoulder pain, trauma, and dislocation in a tertiary hospital in Karnataka. The sagittal proton density (PD) section of the glenoid and enface 3D reconstructed images of the scapula were used to calculate glenoid bone loss and the glenoid index. The baseline data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the Chi-square test was used to test the association of various complications with selected variables of interest. Results The glenoid index calculated in the current study using 3D volumetric CT images and MR sagittal PD images was 0.95±0.01 and 0.95±0.01, respectively. The CT and MRI glenoid bone loss was 5.41±0.65% and 5.38±0.65%, respectively. When compared, the glenoid index and bone loss calculated by MRI and CT revealed a high correlation and significance with a p-value of <0.001. Conclusions The study concluded that MRI is a reliable method for glenoid measurement. The sagittal PD sequence combined with an enface glenoid makes it possible to identify osseous defects linked to glenohumeral joint damage and dislocation. The values derived from 3D CT are identical to the glenoid index and bone loss determined using the sagittal PD sequence in MRI.

Indexed as

ctglenoid bone lossglenoid indexmriradiography

Identifiers

PMID38333443
PMCPMC10851955
OpenAlexW4390806016

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.