SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2026
Artificial intelligence demonstrates comparable diagnostic accuracy to radiologists for anterior cruciate ligament tears on MRI: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are among the most common knee injuries, accounting for half of all knee ligament injuries. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the standard for diagnosing ACL tears, but its interpretation is experience-dependent. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly deep learning (DL), has emerged as a transformative tool in medical imaging, offering advanced pattern recognition for detecting abnormalities.
methodsThis study systematically reviews and meta-analyses the diagnostic accuracy of AI in detecting ACL tears, comparing with radiologists' performance. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines, a comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed and Cochrane databases identified 247 articles, with 40 studies included in qualitative synthesis and 31 in meta-analysis, encompassing 1192 cases.
resultsIn the overall pooled analysis, AI demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-0.95) and specificity of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92-0.93). In the subgroup comparing AI directly to radiologists, AI demonstrated pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.92) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89-0.92), respectively, while radiologists showed 0.85 (95% CI: 0.83-0.87) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.91). Heterogeneity varied, with moderate to high heterogeneity in the analyses. Summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) analysis indicated no significant difference between AI and radiologists in diagnostic accuracy (p = 0.782).
conclusionThese findings suggest that AI can match human diagnostic performance for ACL tears, offering advantages such as reduced costs, faster results and decreased physician burden. Despite variability in study settings, AI shows promise as a reliable diagnostic tool in knee imaging. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
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.