ArticleRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography for rotator cuff tears : Comparison with magnetic resonance arthrography as the gold standard.
Article in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrauma-related rotator cuff tears are a common cause of shoulder pain and functional impairment, particularly in younger and middle-aged adults. Accurate imaging is essential for appropriate diagnosis and management. Magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) is considered superior for evaluating rotator cuff pathology and serves as a reference standard for comparison.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography in detecting trauma-related rotator cuff tears among adults aged 18-52 years, taking MRA as the gold standard. The study also aimed to evaluate the agreement between imaging modalities within this specific cohort.
methodA total of 60 shoulders with rotator cuff injuries that were scanned for MRA, MRI, and ultrasound were included in the study. Frequency analysis, cross-tabulation, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa statistics were used to assess the level of agreement between imaging techniques. Paired comparisons between imaging modalities were analyzed using McNemar's test to assess differences in diagnostic performance.
resultsOverall, MRI showed a higher proportion of true-positive detections for supraspinatus (SSP) tears (30.0%) compared to ultrasonography (28.3%), while ultrasonography demonstrated a higher detection rate for subscapularis (SSC) tears. The a sensitivity of MRI for detecting SSP tears was 81.2% and 75% for SSC tears. Age- and gender-based analysis revealed that ultrasonography showed higher true-positive detection in younger patients, whereas MRI showed greater sensitivity in older patients. Kappa statistics demonstrated substantial agreement between MRI and MRA (κ = 0.892) and moderate agreement between ultrasonography and MRA (κ = 0.751).
conclusionUltrasonography and MRI are reliable for diagnosing trauma-related rotator cuff tears in adults aged 18-52 years. Within this age range, MRI performs better in older patients, while ultrasonography is more effective in younger individuals; MRA remains the reference standard.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41854877What 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.