27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography, MRI and MR arthrography in the characterisation of rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Different diagnostic imaging modalities, such as ultrasonography (US), MRI, MR arthrography (MRA) are commonly used for the characterisation of rotator cuff (RC) disorders. Since the most recent systematic reviews on medical imaging, multiple diagnostic studies have been published, most using more advanced technological characteristics. The first objective was to perform a meta-analysis on the diagnostic accuracy of medical imaging for characterisation of RC disorders. Since US is used at the point of care in environments such as sports medicine, a secondary analysis assessed accuracy by radiologists and non-radiologists.

          Methods

          A systematic search in three databases was conducted. Two raters performed data extraction and evaluation of risk of bias independently, and agreement was achieved by consensus. Hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic package was used to calculate pooled estimates of included diagnostic studies.

          Results

          Diagnostic accuracy of US, MRI and MRA in the characterisation of full-thickness RC tears was high with overall estimates of sensitivity and specificity over 0.90. As for partial RC tears and tendinopathy, overall estimates of specificity were also high (>0.90), while sensitivity was lower (0.67–0.83). Diagnostic accuracy of US was similar whether a trained radiologist, sonographer or orthopaedist performed it.

          Conclusions

          Our results show the diagnostic accuracy of US, MRI and MRA in the characterisation of full-thickness RC tears. Since full thickness tear constitutes a key consideration for surgical repair, this is an important characteristic when selecting an imaging modality for RC disorder. When considering accuracy, cost, and safety, US is the best option.

          Related collections

          Most cited references118

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review.

          Studies of diagnostic accuracy are subject to different sources of bias and variation than studies that evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention. Little is known about the effects of these sources of bias and variation. To summarize the evidence on factors that can lead to bias or variation in the results of diagnostic accuracy studies. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and BIOSIS, and the methodologic databases of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and the Cochrane Collaboration. Methodologic experts in diagnostic tests were contacted. Studies that investigated the effects of bias and variation on measures of test performance were eligible for inclusion, which was assessed by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. The best-documented effects of bias and variation were found for demographic features, disease prevalence and severity, partial verification bias, clinical review bias, and observer and instrument variation. For other sources, such as distorted selection of participants, absent or inappropriate reference standard, differential verification bias, and review bias, the amount of evidence was limited. Evidence was lacking for other features, including incorporation bias, treatment paradox, arbitrary choice of threshold value, and dropouts. Many issues in the design and conduct of diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to bias or variation; however, the empirical evidence about the size and effect of these issues is limited.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Accuracy of MRI, MR arthrography, and ultrasound in the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears: a meta-analysis.

            The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of MRI, MR arthrography, and ultrasound for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears through a meta-analysis of the studies in the literature. Articles reporting the sensitivities and specificities of MRI, MR arthrography, or ultrasound for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears were identified. Surgical (open and arthroscopic) reference standard was an inclusion criterion. Summary statistics were generated using pooled data. Scatterplots of the data sets were plotted on a graph of sensitivity versus (1 - specificity). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated. Sixty-five articles met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. In diagnosing a full-thickness tear or a partial-thickness rotator cuff tear, MR arthrography is more sensitive and specific than either MRI or ultrasound (p 0.05). Summary ROC curves for MR arthrography, MRI, and ultrasound for all tears show the area under the ROC curve is greatest for MR arthrography (0.935), followed by ultrasound (0.889) and then MRI (0.878); however, pairwise comparisons of these curves show no significant differences between MRI and ultrasound (p > 0.05). MR arthrography is the most sensitive and specific technique for diagnosing both full- and partial-thickness rotator cuff tears. Ultrasound and MRI are comparable in both sensitivity and specificity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy.

              Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy summarize the accuracy, e.g. the sensitivity and specificity, of diagnostic tests in a systematic and transparent way. The aim of such a review is to investigate whether a test is sufficiently specific or sensitive to fit its role in practice, to compare the accuracy of two or more diagnostic tests, or to investigate where existing variation in results comes from. The search strategy should be broad and preferably fully reported, to enable readers to assess the completeness of it. Included studies usually have a cross-sectional design in which the tests of interest, ideally both the index test and its comparator, are evaluated against the reference standard. They should be a reflection of the situation that the review question refers to. The quality of included studies is assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist, containing items such as a consecutive and all-inclusive patient selection process, blinding of index test and reference standard assessment, a valid reference standard, and complete verification of all included participants. Studies recruiting cases separately from (healthy) controls are regarded as bearing a high risk of bias. For meta-analysis, the bivariate model or the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model is used. These models take into account potential threshold effects and the correlation between sensitivity and specificity. They also allow addition of covariates for investigatation of potential sources of heterogeneity. Finally, the results from the meta-analyses should be explained and interpreted for the reader, to be well understood. © 2013 The Author Clinical Microbiology and Infection © 2013 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Sports Med
                Br J Sports Med
                bjsports
                bjsm
                British Journal of Sports Medicine
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                0306-3674
                1473-0480
                October 2015
                12 February 2015
                : 49
                : 20
                : 1316-1328
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [2 ]Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [3 ]Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital Research Center, University of Montreal Affiliated Research Center , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
                [4 ]Faculty of Medicine, School of Rehabilitation, Université de Montreal , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
                [5 ]Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec , Quebec City, Quebec, Canada
                [6 ]School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University , Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
                [7 ]Department of Radiology, Research Center, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal , Montreal, Quebec, Canada
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Jean-Sébastien Roy, Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche en réadaptation et en intégration sociale (CIRRIS), 525, boulevard Wilfrid-Hamel, local H-1710, Quebec, Canada G1M 2S8; jean-sebastien.roy@ 123456rea.ulaval.ca
                Article
                bjsports-2014-094148
                10.1136/bjsports-2014-094148
                4621376
                25677796
                1c70c7ae-d59a-4603-ac10-986b9cc6648a
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 15 August 2014
                : 9 January 2015
                : 14 January 2015
                Categories
                1506
                Review
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Sports medicine
                shoulder,ultrasound,mri,meta-analysis
                Sports medicine
                shoulder, ultrasound, mri, meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article