ArticleAdvanced biomedical research2025
Role of Magnetic Resonance Arthrography (MRA) in the Diagnosis of Shoulder Injuries.
Article in Advanced biomedical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Imaging continues to have a crucial role in evaluating patients with shoulder pain, helping to make treatment choices. Magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA), rather than magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is now routinely used to diagnose shoulder injuries. Against the gold standard investigation of arthroscopy, the study aimed to determine the accuracy of MRA in the evaluation of shoulder injuries. Materials and Methods: From June 2017 to May 2019, a cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary care health setup in North India. A total of 50 individuals were enrolled for diagnostic imaging with rotator cuff (RC) pathology. Patients were assessed using an MRA and their clinical history. In comparison with the gold standard for arthroscopy, the sensitivity (Sn), positive predictive value (PPV), and diagnostic accuracy (DA) of MRA for diagnosing shoulder injuries were evaluated. A Results: The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of the patients was 37.32 ± 12.78 years. There were seven women and 43 (86%) men. The different lesions were superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tear (24 (48%)), Bankart lesions (19 (38%)), anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALSPA) (4 (8%)), partial articular supraspinatus tendon avulsion (PASTA) lesion (2 (4%)), and Buford lesions (1 (2%)). The Sn, PPV, and DA of MRA were 98%, 100%, and 98%, respectively, for identifying the shoulder injury. Conclusion: It was concluded that MRA was reasonably accurate at diagnosing shoulder injuries. MRA demonstrated an excellent 98% Sn in identifying shoulder injuries and missed only one case of shoulder injury, suggesting that it can be an advantageous imaging tool for recognizing and evaluating shoulder injuries for immediate diagnosis and management.
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.