Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41503634›Full record

ArticleActa chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca2025

[Comparison of the Clinical Examination, Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Intraoperative].

Roman Madeja, Peter Sklienka, Jana Pometlová, Karel Frydrýšek, Dominika Madejová, Pavel Douša

Abstract readComparative StudyEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Roman MadejaKlinika urazove chirurgie a ortopedie Fakultni nemocnice Ostrava.
Peter SklienkaKlinika anesteziologie a resuscitace Fakultni nemocnice Ostrava.
Jana PometlováKlinika urazove chirurgie a ortopedie Fakultni nemocnice Ostrava.
Karel FrydrýšekVysoka skola banska - Technicka univerzita Ostrava.
Dominika MadejováUrologicka klinika Fakultni nemocnice Ostrava.
Pavel DoušaKlinika urazove chirurgie a ortopedie Fakultni nemocnice Ostrava.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of the studyDiagnosing shoulder pathologies is rather challenging. The reason is not only the anatomical structure and biomechanics of the joint, but also the concomitant conditions, specifically of cervical spine, which can significantly contribute to the pathophysiology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging in relation to the actual intraoperative finding in patients with selected shoulder pathologies. MATERIAL AND

methodsThe data of patients in whom shoulder arthroscopy was performed at the Department of Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Ostrava in the 2018-2019 period were extracted retrospectively from the hospital information system. Our attention was focused on 4 diagnoses, namely rotator cuff tear (RCT), anterior shoulder instability due to lesion of the anterior capsular-labral complex (STA), shoulder impingement syndrome (impingement) and SLAP lesion - superior labral anterior posterior tear (SLAP).

resultsThe study included 71 patients, of whom 46 were men (65%) and 25 women (35%). The difference in the median age of men and women was not significant (p = 0.740). High specificity (clinical examination 91.8%, MRI 91.8%) and low sensitivity (clinical examination 58.0%, MRI 61.0%) were evident in all diagnoses. In shoulder instability (STA) the sensitivity was significantly higher than in the other diagnoses. The accuracy of both methods was also high (clinical examination 79.9%, MRI 81.0%). DISCUSSION: These matters have already been described in literature. Nonetheless, most of the studies compared the MRI and arthroscopy findings. Our study reflects the actual diagnostic procedure, i.e. the examination of the patient, referral for MRI for suspected pathology and subsequent surgery to confirm or rule out the diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging can detect also other pathological findings that are not apparent during shoulder arthroscopy.

conclusionsHigh specificity of clinical examination as well as MRI was confirmed by this study. The sensitivity of both examination methods was significantly lower, except for the diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability (STA), where it was satisfactorily high for both methods. In the case of a positive clinical finding, in rotator cuff tear (RCT) diagnosis the MRI scan provides higher accuracy and eliminates false positives, which was, however, not confirmed in the other diagnoses. In the case of a negative clinical finding, the MRI helps refine the diagnoses. This does not apply to the STA diagnosis, where we may assume that a negative finding of clinical examination will most likely mean a negative intraoperative finding and this negative predictive value will not be increased by the MRI.

Indexed as

ArthroscopyJoint InstabilityMagnetic Resonance ImagingPhysical ExaminationShoulder InjuriesShoulder JointAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRotator Cuff InjuriesSensitivity and SpecificityShoulder Impingement Syndromearthroscopymagnetic resonance imagingshoulder joint.

Identifiers

PMID41503634

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.