Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39422725›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2025

MRI deep learning models for assisted diagnosis of knee pathologies: a systematic review.

Keiley Mead, Tom Cross, Greg Roger, Rohan Sabharwal, Sahaj Singh, Nicola Giannotti

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Initial [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

6 authors.

Keiley MeadThe University of Sydney School of Health Sciences, Sydney, NSW, Australia. kmea3418@uni.sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-9312-8431
Tom CrossThe Stadium Sports Medicine Clinic, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Greg RogerVestech Medical Pty Limited, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rohan SabharwalPRP Diagnostic Imaging, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sahaj SinghPRP Diagnostic Imaging, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nicola GiannottiThe University of Sydney School of Health Sciences, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDespite showing encouraging outcomes, the precision of deep learning (DL) models using different convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for diagnosis remains under investigation. This systematic review aims to summarise the status of DL MRI models developed for assisting the diagnosis of a variety of knee abnormalities. MATERIALS AND

methodsFive databases were systematically searched, employing predefined terms such as 'Knee AND 3D AND MRI AND DL'. Selected inclusion criteria were used to screen publications by title, abstract, and full text. The synthesis of results was performed by two independent reviewers.

resultsFifty-four articles were included. The studies focused on anterior cruciate ligament injuries (n = 19, 36%), osteoarthritis (n = 9, 17%), meniscal injuries (n = 13, 24%), abnormal knee appearance (n = 11, 20%), and other (n = 2, 4%). The DL models in this review primarily used the following CNNs: ResNet (n = 11, 21%), VGG (n = 6, 11%), DenseNet (n = 4, 8%), and DarkNet (n = 3, 6%). DL models showed high-performance metrics compared to ground truth. DL models for the detection of a specific injury outperformed those by up to 4.5% for general abnormality detection.

conclusionDespite the varied study designs used among the reviewed articles, DL models showed promising outcomes in the assisted detection of selected knee pathologies by MRI. This review underscores the importance of validating these models with larger MRI datasets to close the existing gap between current DL model performance and clinical requirements. KEY POINTS: Question What is the status of DL model availability for knee pathology detection in MRI and their clinical potential? Findings Pathology-specific DL models reported higher accuracy compared to DL models for the detection of general abnormalities of the knee. DL model performance was mainly influenced by the quantity and diversity of data available for model training. Clinical relevance These findings should encourage future developments to improve patient care, support personalised diagnosis and treatment, optimise costs, and advance artificial intelligence-based medical imaging practices.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedKnee InjuriesKnee JointMagnetic Resonance ImagingHumansArtificial intelligenceDeep learningKneeMagnetic resonance imagingThree-dimensional

Identifiers

PMID39422725
PMCPMC12021734

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.