ArticleSkeletal radiology2026
Identification of TFCC substructure injury in wrist MRI using computer vision: a diagnostic aid for radiologists.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to develop an automated model to assist in the detection of substructural injuries of the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC), thereby reducing the reliance on subjective assessment.
methodsThis retrospective study utilized 330 TFCC injured patients and 273 healthy controls from two institutions, only analyzing 2821 coronal fat-saturated T2-weighted imaging slices. From 483 samples (267 injured, 216 normal), 2292 images were processed: 1834 for training, 458 for validation, with an internal test set of 209 images from 47 samples (26 injured, 21 normal). An external test set comprised 320 images from 73 samples (37 injured, 36 normal) at another institution. Radiologists segmented and classified TFCC substructures by consensus. Different YOLO versions were trained and compared, with the optimal model benchmarked against musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists (Resident1 and Attending2).
resultsAmong evaluated YOLO versions, the YOLO11l model exhibited the optimal segmentation performance, with mean Dice (mDice) coefficients of 0.82 (internal test set) and 0.77 (external test set). Its classification sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 91.67%, 76.11%, and 83.25% on the internal test set, significantly outperforming other versions. On the external test set, corresponding values were 84.68%, 61.22%, and 71.00%, representing the best overall performance. Notably, the diagnostic performance of the YOLO11l model was non-inferior to that of Resident1 (p = 0.41) but inferior to that of Attending2 (p = 0.015).
conclusionsThe YOLO11l model represents a promising approach to aiding the assessment of TFCC injuries. Compared with less experienced radiology residents, this model can provide reliable and reproducible diagnostic support.
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.