Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40035861›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2025

Diagnostic accuracy of MRI and US for peroneal tendon tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Samir Ghandour, Ronald W Mercer, James A Strahan, Lorena Bejarano-Pineda, Zachary E Stewart

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Samir GhandourDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Ronald W MercerDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
James A StrahanDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Lorena Bejarano-PinedaHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Zachary E StewartDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. zstewart@mgh.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0245-1270

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe diagnostic accuracy of US and MRI for identifying peroneal tendon tears is unknown. The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of these modalities for the diagnosis of peroneal tendon tears. MATERIALS AND

methodsStudies on diagnostic accuracy of MRI or US for peroneus brevis (PB) and/or longus pathology were searched in Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed. Systematic review was performed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Pooled diagnostic accuracy of MRI and US were calculated by using a bivariate random-effects model.

resultsTwelve studies were included for analysis. Eight studies reported on MRI, three reported on US, and one study included both. Studies were all at a high risk of bias, with only one study satisfying at least two of the four risk-of-bias criteria. Reported accuracy data was heterogeneous for both MRI and US. For PB tear, US showed higher pooled sensitivity than MRI (US: 93%; 95% CI: 75%, 98%; MRI: 73%; 95% CI: 56%, 87%); and similar pooled specificity to MRI (US: 85%; 95% CI: 55%, 96%; MRI: 88%; 95% CI: 70%, 95%) For peroneus longus, US had high pooled sensitivity (94%; 95% CI: 71%, 99%) and specificity (94%; 95% CI: 79%, 98%), whereas MRI was similarly specific (91%; 95% CI: 76%, 97%) but less sensitive (60%; 95% CI: 35%, 85%).

conclusionUS was observed to be sensitive and specific for peroneal tendon tears, while MRI was found to be specific but insensitive. The scarcity of literature addressing this question and the heterogeneity of the results precluded any confident conclusion of the superiority/inferiority of either modality. KEY POINTS: Question Peroneal tendon tears are a common cause of lateral ankle pain, but the accuracy of MRI and US for identifying these tears is unknown. Finding Pooled data shows US to be both sensitive and specific and MRI to be specific and insensitive for peroneal tendon tears; however, the literature is scarce, at risk of bias, and results are inconsistent. Clinical relevance MRI and US are commonly utilized to assess lateral ankle pain. Though pooled-data suggests that US may be more sensitive, confident conclusion of the diagnostic accuracy of these modalities is limited by the level-of and quality-of the available evidence.

Indexed as

Ankle InjuriesMagnetic Resonance ImagingTendon InjuriesHumansReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonographyMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysisSystematic reviewTendon injuriesUltrasound

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.