Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2233010849
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vincken, P. W. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bloem, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vincken, P. W. J.
Right arrow Articles by Bloem, J. L.
(Radiology 2002;223:739-746.)
© RSNA, 2002

Effectiveness of MR Imaging in Selection of Patients for Arthroscopy of the Knee1

Patrice W. J. Vincken, MD, Bert P. M. ter Braak, MD, Arian R. van Erkell, MD, Theo P. W. de Rooy, MD, Walter M. C. Mallens, MD, Wendy Post, PhD and Johan L. Bloem, MD

1 From the Departments of Radiology (P.W.J.V., B.P.M.t.B., A.R.v.E., J.L.B.) and Medical Statistics (W.P.), Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Westeinde Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands (T.P.W.d.R.); and Department of Radiology, Leyenburg Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands (W.M.C.M.). Received April 26, 2001; revision requested June 9; revision received September 6; accepted October 16. Address correspondence to P.W.J.V. (e-mail: p.w.j.vincken@lumc.nl).



View larger version (27K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Schematic shows study design. MR+ = signs of major injury, arthroscopy indicated; MR- = normal MR images or signs of minor injury, arthroscopy not indicated.

 


View larger version (158K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Sagittal intermediate-weighted MR image (2,350/20) reveals a tear in the posterior horn of the medial meniscus (arrow) that extends to both upper and lower articular surfaces. This tear was not recognized at arthroscopy performed 16 days after the MR imaging examination and therefore constitutes a false-positive diagnosis at MR.

 


View larger version (147K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Sagittal intermediate-weighted MR image (2,350/20) reveals a tear in the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus (arrow) that extends to both upper and lower articular surfaces. This tear was not recognized at arthroscopy performed 14 days after the MR imaging examination and therefore constitutes a false-positive diagnosis at MR.

 


View larger version (184K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 4a. (a,b) Sagittal intermediate-weighted MR images (2,350/20) reveal what was thought to be a complete ACL rupture (arrow) that was not appreciated as a complete rupture at arthroscopy. The radiologist diagnosed a complete rupture extending toward the posterior cruciate ligament. According to the arthroscopist, however, it was a partial rupture that involved approximately 50% of the ligamentous body.

 


View larger version (186K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 4b. (a,b) Sagittal intermediate-weighted MR images (2,350/20) reveal what was thought to be a complete ACL rupture (arrow) that was not appreciated as a complete rupture at arthroscopy. The radiologist diagnosed a complete rupture extending toward the posterior cruciate ligament. According to the arthroscopist, however, it was a partial rupture that involved approximately 50% of the ligamentous body.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2002 by the Radiological Society of North America.