ArticleCureus2024
Diagnostic Accuracy of Non-invasive Tests Versus Arthroscopy in Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Injuries.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Arthroscopy Correlation in Traumatic Knee Injuries: A Retrospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe knee joint assessment to detect anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury after trauma involves clinical examination and radiography. The gold standard method is doing arthroscopy. We did this study seeking to evaluate the effectiveness of other non-invasive diagnostic methods, including the Anterior Drawer test, Lachman test and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting ACL tears after trauma, compared to the reference standard method (the arthroscopy). METHODOLOGY: This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in the Orthopaedic Department of the Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, for six months. A total of 86 participants with knee injuries fulfilling the inclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Mechanism of injury, side of injury and body weight were recorded. The Anterior Drawer test and Lachman test for ACL injury were performed by orthopaedic surgeons with at least five years of post-fellowship experience in orthopaedic surgery. Sensitivities, specificities and accuracy of the clinical tests and MRI were calculated.
resultsThe statistical analysis revealed that the mean age of participants was 35.73 (SD 12.7) years, with a range from 18 to 55 years. Among the participants, 67 (77.91%) were male and 19 (22.09%) were female. The side of injury was predominantly right in 50 (58.14%) and left in 36 (41.86%) participants. Road traffic accidents (RTAs) were the leading cause of knee injury, accounting for 63.95% (55) of cases, followed by sports injuries at 23.26% (20). Regarding diagnostic accuracy, MRI showed a sensitivity of 98.57%, specificity of 87.50% and diagnostic accuracy of 96.51% in detecting ACL tears. The Lachman test demonstrated a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 87.5% and diagnostic accuracy of 89.53% compared to arthroscopy. Similarly, the anterior Drawer test exhibited a sensitivity of 88.57%, specificity of 87.50% and diagnostic accuracy of 88.37% against the gold standard of arthroscopy. These findings underscore the effectiveness of these diagnostic modalities in identifying ACL injuries.
conclusionsAll three tests (MRI, Lachman test and anterior Drawer test) can be used for the diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament injury with optimal results.
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.