ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Evaluation of Shoulder Injuries: A Comparative Study of Imaging by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Magnetic Resonance Arthrography (MRA).
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Shoulder Pain Imaging: A Narrative Review of Current Practice and Emerging Trends.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Article
- Relationship between SLAP Lesions and Shoulder Joint Capsule Thickness: An MR Arthrographic Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In contrast to the standard shoulder arthroscopy, current radio-diagnostic techniques like magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provide less invasive intricate structural detail of shoulder anatomy. Objectives: Comparison of efficacy of MRA and MRI for diagnosing suspected rotator cuff injury. Materials and Methods: Over the course of 4 years (from June 2017 to June 2021), a comparative study, including 100 individuals with suspected rotator cuff pathology, was conducted. For the evaluation of shoulder injuries, the assessment and comparison of MRA and MRI were done in terms of sensitivity (Sn), positive predictive value (PPV), and diagnostic accuracy (DA). Results: MRI and MRA were positive in 76 (76%) and 98 (98%) patients, respectively. The Sn and PPV of MRI for diagnosing the shoulder injury were 76% and 100%, respectively, whereas the Sn and PPV of MRA were 98% and 100%, respectively. MRA was better than MRI in terms of diagnostic accuracy (98% vs. 76%, Conclusion: MRA is a nonsurgical effective method in evaluating and diagnosing rotator cuff injuries in comparison to MRI.
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.