+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparative reliability and diagnostic performance of conventional 3T magnetic resonance imaging and 1.5T magnetic resonance arthrography for the evaluation of internal derangement of the hip



Comparative reliability and diagnostic performance of conventional 3T magnetic resonance imaging and 1.5T magnetic resonance arthrography for the evaluation of internal derangement of the hip



European Radiology 28(3): 963-971



To compare the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3T MRI against 1.5T MR arthrography (MRA) in patients with clinical femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Sixty-eight consecutive patients with clinical FAI underwent both 1.5T MRA and 3T MRI. Imaging was prospectively analysed by two musculoskeletal radiologists, blinded to patient outcomes and scored for internal derangement including labral and cartilage abnormality. Interobserver variation was assessed by kappa analysis. Thirty-nine patients subsequently underwent hip arthroscopy and surgical results and radiology findings were analysed. Both readers had higher sensitivities for detecting labral tears with 3T MRI compared to 1.5T MRA (not statistically significant p=0.07). For acetabular cartilage defect both readers had higher statistically significant sensitivities using 3T MRI compared to 1.5T MRA (p=0.02). Both readers had a slightly higher sensitivity for detecting delamination with 1.5T MRA compared to 3T MRI, but these differences were not statistically significant (p=0.66). Interobserver agreement was substantial to perfect agreement for all parameters except the identification of delamination (3T MRI showed moderate agreement and 1.5T MRA substantial agreement). Conventional 3T MRI may be at least equivalent to 1.5T MRA in detecting acetabular labrum and possibly superior to 1.5T MRA in detecting cartilage defects in patients with suspected FAI. • Conventional 3T MRI is equivalent to 1.5T MRA for diagnosing labral tears. • Conventional 3T MRI is superior to 1.5T MRA for diagnosing acetabular cartilage defect. • Conventional 3T MRI is equivalent to 1.5T MRA for diagnosing cartilage delamination. • Symptom severity score was significantly higher (p<0.05) in group proceeding to surgery.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 059525400

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 28986631

DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5069-4


Related references

The diagnostic performance of non-contrast 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (3-T MRI) versus 1.5-Tesla magnetic resonance arthrography (1.5-T MRA) in femoro-acetabular impingement. European Journal of Radiology 88: 109-116, 2017

Evaluation of meniscal repair with serial magnetic resonance imaging: a comparative study between conventional MRI and indirect MR arthrography. European Journal of Radiology 50(3): 231-237, 2004

The diagnostic accuracy of acetabular labral tears using magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography: a meta-analysis. European Radiology 21(4): 863-874, 2011

Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder: dependence on the level of training of the performing radiologist for diagnostic accuracy. Skeletal Radiology 39(7): 661-667, 2010

Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder: dependence on the level of training of the performing radiologist for diagnostic accuracy. Yearbook of Diagnostic Radiology 2011: 88-89, 2011

The diagnostic test accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance arthrography and computer tomography in the detection of chondral lesions of the hip. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology 23(3): 335-344, 2014

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography of the hip is dependent on specialist training of the radiologist. Skeletal Radiology 41(6): 659-665, 2012

Diagnostic accuracy of clinical assessment, magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance arthrography, and intra-articular injection in hip arthroscopy patients. American Journal of Sports Medicine 32(7): 1668-1674, 2004

Anatomy, variants, and pathologies of the superior glenohumeral ligament: magnetic resonance imaging with three-dimensional volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination sequence and conventional magnetic resonance arthrography. Korean Journal of Radiology 15(4): 508-522, 2014

Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography for triangular fibrocartilaginous complex injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 94(9): 824-832, 2012

Magnetic resonance in traumatic brain injury: A comparative study of the different conventional magnetic resonance imaging sequences and their diagnostic value in diffuse axonal injury. Neurocirugia 28(6): 266-275, 2017

Evaluation of collateral ligament injuries of the metacarpophalangeal joints with magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography. Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology 36(1): 11-20, 2007

Improved diagnostic accuracy with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the breast using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and 3-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Investigative Radiology 49(6): 421-430, 2015

High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging and conventional magnetic resonance imaging on a standard field-strength magnetic resonance system compared to arthroscopy in patients with suspected meniscal tears. Academic Radiology 15(7): 928-933, 2008

Capsular lesions with glenohumeral ligament injuries in patients with primary shoulder dislocation: magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography evaluation. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports 21(6): E291-E297, 2012