These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: 3.0 T MRI is more recommended to detect acetabular labral tears than MR Arthrography: an updated meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.
    Author: Zhang P, Li C, Wang W, Zhang B, Miao W, Liu Y.
    Journal: J Orthop Surg Res; 2022 Mar 01; 17(1):126. PubMed ID: 35232459.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence on the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for detecting acetabular labral tears (ALT). METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until February 5, 2021, to identify original research studies reporting the diagnostic performance of MRI/MRA for the detection of ALT. Study methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. The summary sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of the studies were estimated using a bivariate model. We calculated the post-test probability to assess the clinical utility of MRI/MRA. Univariate meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to assess between-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: We included 22 studies (n = 1670 patients). The meta-analytic summary Se and Sp for MRI were 0.8 (95% CI 0.51-0.94) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.68-0.84), respectively, while for MRA they were 0.89 (95% CI 0.82-0.93) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.56-0.80). MRA showed a higher area under the summary receiver operating curve (SROC) (0.87 vs. 0.80) than MRI. MRI could increase the post-test probability to 0.78 and could decrease the post-test probability to 0.21, MRA could increase the post-test probability to 0.74 and could decrease the post-test probability to 0.14. Meta-regression analysis showed two significant factors affecting study heterogeneity: MR field strength and reference standard. After dividing the studies into two subgroups based on the MR field strength, we found that the Se values of 3.0 T MRI were very close to MRA (0.87 vs. 0.89), the Sp values of 3.0 T MRI were superior to MRA (0.77 vs. 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Given that 3.0 T MRI could provide a non-invasive, fast and convenient method to recognize suspicious ALT cases, 3.0 T MRI is more recommended than MRA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]