Comparative Accuracy of 1.5T MRI, 3T MRI, and Static Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Small Gaps in Repaired Flexor Tendons: A Cadaveric Study
We hypothesized that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would more accurately diagnose small gaps (
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.) 2021-04, Vol.46 (4), p.287-294 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 294 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 287 |
| container_title | The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.) |
| container_volume | 46 |
| creator | Renfree, Kevin J. Dahiya, Nirvikar Kransdorf, Mark J. Zhang, Nan Patel, Karan A. Drace, Patricia A. |
| description | We hypothesized that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would more accurately diagnose small gaps ( |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.10.031 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2478595162</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0363502320306821</els_id><sourcerecordid>2478595162</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-35ea322fa92736916511577ed8656ee7f29d1425675f7733510b47924d5ec42d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS1URKeFF2CBvOyiCf6J7QaxGU3pj1SE1JmuLde-AY-SONjJqPMGPHYdzcCS1ZXO_c6R7j0IfaSkpITKz9ty-yuZkhE2CyXh9A1aUMFpIYWsTtCCcMkLQRg_RWcpbQnJLi7eoVPOK0FrUi3Qn1XoBhPN6HeAl9ZO0dg9Dg2mpdjg74_3l5gfp-kdXo-ZtPipHaNJYcqK7_G1Nz_7kHyafevOtC2-NUOaV48wGB_B4ZsWXkLEG-hd6NMXvMQr48wOYk5bj5Pbv0dvG9Mm-HCc5-jp5ttmdVc8_Li9Xy0fCsuFHAsuwHDGGlMzxWVNpaBUKAXuKt8MoBpWO1oxIZVolOJcUPJcqZpVToCtmOPn6OKQO8Twe4I06s4nC21reghT0qxSV6IWVLKMsgNqY0gpQqOH6DsT95oSPTegt3puQM8NzFpuIJs-HfOn5w7cP8vfl2fg6wGAfOXOQ9TJeugtuPwoO2oX_P_yXwF8x5P9</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2478595162</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative Accuracy of 1.5T MRI, 3T MRI, and Static Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Small Gaps in Repaired Flexor Tendons: A Cadaveric Study</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Renfree, Kevin J. ; Dahiya, Nirvikar ; Kransdorf, Mark J. ; Zhang, Nan ; Patel, Karan A. ; Drace, Patricia A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Renfree, Kevin J. ; Dahiya, Nirvikar ; Kransdorf, Mark J. ; Zhang, Nan ; Patel, Karan A. ; Drace, Patricia A.</creatorcontrib><description>We hypothesized that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would more accurately diagnose small gaps (<6 mm) after flexor tendon repair than static ultrasound (US) and that suture artifact would negatively impair accuracy.
A laceration of the flexor digitorum profundus was created in 160 fresh-frozen cadaveric digits and randomized to either an intact repair (0-mm gap) or repairs using a locked 4-strand suture repair with either 4-0 Prolene, Ethibond, or and gaps of 2, 4,or 6 mm; or no suture in which 2-, 4-, or 6-mm gaps were created without a suture crossing the repair site. We performed 1.5T and 3T MRI and static US studies; gap widths were estimated by radiologists blinded to suture presence and true gap widths.
The 1.5 and 3.0T MRI had a lower mean error than US for gap sizes 0 and 2 mm. All 3 modalities performed similarly for 4- and 6-mm gaps. Documentation of imaging artifact worsened error, and odds of seeing artifacts were 1.72 higher with MRI than with US. Suture did not worsen artifact nor impair accuracy for any of the 3 modalities. When no suture was used, all 3 modalities significantly overestimated the true gap.
MRI is most accurate for small gaps less than 4 mm. Although all modalities overestimated gap sizes in specimens with a 0-mm gap (intact tendon repair), mean overestimation (<2 mm) was not clinically relevant. Ultrasound overestimated 2-mm gaps (clinically intact repairs), whereas MRIs did not. We recommend MRI for evaluation of gaps after flexor tendon repair. The 1.5T has slightly better sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing clinically intact (gap < 3 mm) from clinically impaired (gap > 3 mm) repairs than the 3T.
Accurate diagnosis of intact repairs or small gaps (<3 mm) might prevent unnecessary exploration or allow modification of rehabilitation protocols. Diagnosis of clinically relevant gaps (3–6 mm) may allow for earlier revision surgery before significant tendon retraction and adhesions develop, possibly necessitating a staged reconstruction.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-5023</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-6564</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.10.031</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33451904</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Flexor tendon ; gap ; magnetic resonance imaging ; ultrasound</subject><ispartof>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.), 2021-04, Vol.46 (4), p.287-294</ispartof><rights>2021 American Society for Surgery of the Hand</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-35ea322fa92736916511577ed8656ee7f29d1425675f7733510b47924d5ec42d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-35ea322fa92736916511577ed8656ee7f29d1425675f7733510b47924d5ec42d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.10.031$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33451904$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Renfree, Kevin J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dahiya, Nirvikar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kransdorf, Mark J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Nan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Karan A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drace, Patricia A.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative Accuracy of 1.5T MRI, 3T MRI, and Static Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Small Gaps in Repaired Flexor Tendons: A Cadaveric Study</title><title>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</title><addtitle>J Hand Surg Am</addtitle><description>We hypothesized that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would more accurately diagnose small gaps (<6 mm) after flexor tendon repair than static ultrasound (US) and that suture artifact would negatively impair accuracy.
A laceration of the flexor digitorum profundus was created in 160 fresh-frozen cadaveric digits and randomized to either an intact repair (0-mm gap) or repairs using a locked 4-strand suture repair with either 4-0 Prolene, Ethibond, or and gaps of 2, 4,or 6 mm; or no suture in which 2-, 4-, or 6-mm gaps were created without a suture crossing the repair site. We performed 1.5T and 3T MRI and static US studies; gap widths were estimated by radiologists blinded to suture presence and true gap widths.
The 1.5 and 3.0T MRI had a lower mean error than US for gap sizes 0 and 2 mm. All 3 modalities performed similarly for 4- and 6-mm gaps. Documentation of imaging artifact worsened error, and odds of seeing artifacts were 1.72 higher with MRI than with US. Suture did not worsen artifact nor impair accuracy for any of the 3 modalities. When no suture was used, all 3 modalities significantly overestimated the true gap.
MRI is most accurate for small gaps less than 4 mm. Although all modalities overestimated gap sizes in specimens with a 0-mm gap (intact tendon repair), mean overestimation (<2 mm) was not clinically relevant. Ultrasound overestimated 2-mm gaps (clinically intact repairs), whereas MRIs did not. We recommend MRI for evaluation of gaps after flexor tendon repair. The 1.5T has slightly better sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing clinically intact (gap < 3 mm) from clinically impaired (gap > 3 mm) repairs than the 3T.
Accurate diagnosis of intact repairs or small gaps (<3 mm) might prevent unnecessary exploration or allow modification of rehabilitation protocols. Diagnosis of clinically relevant gaps (3–6 mm) may allow for earlier revision surgery before significant tendon retraction and adhesions develop, possibly necessitating a staged reconstruction.</description><subject>Flexor tendon</subject><subject>gap</subject><subject>magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>ultrasound</subject><issn>0363-5023</issn><issn>1531-6564</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhS1URKeFF2CBvOyiCf6J7QaxGU3pj1SE1JmuLde-AY-SONjJqPMGPHYdzcCS1ZXO_c6R7j0IfaSkpITKz9ty-yuZkhE2CyXh9A1aUMFpIYWsTtCCcMkLQRg_RWcpbQnJLi7eoVPOK0FrUi3Qn1XoBhPN6HeAl9ZO0dg9Dg2mpdjg74_3l5gfp-kdXo-ZtPipHaNJYcqK7_G1Nz_7kHyafevOtC2-NUOaV48wGB_B4ZsWXkLEG-hd6NMXvMQr48wOYk5bj5Pbv0dvG9Mm-HCc5-jp5ttmdVc8_Li9Xy0fCsuFHAsuwHDGGlMzxWVNpaBUKAXuKt8MoBpWO1oxIZVolOJcUPJcqZpVToCtmOPn6OKQO8Twe4I06s4nC21reghT0qxSV6IWVLKMsgNqY0gpQqOH6DsT95oSPTegt3puQM8NzFpuIJs-HfOn5w7cP8vfl2fg6wGAfOXOQ9TJeugtuPwoO2oX_P_yXwF8x5P9</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Renfree, Kevin J.</creator><creator>Dahiya, Nirvikar</creator><creator>Kransdorf, Mark J.</creator><creator>Zhang, Nan</creator><creator>Patel, Karan A.</creator><creator>Drace, Patricia A.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>Comparative Accuracy of 1.5T MRI, 3T MRI, and Static Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Small Gaps in Repaired Flexor Tendons: A Cadaveric Study</title><author>Renfree, Kevin J. ; Dahiya, Nirvikar ; Kransdorf, Mark J. ; Zhang, Nan ; Patel, Karan A. ; Drace, Patricia A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-35ea322fa92736916511577ed8656ee7f29d1425675f7733510b47924d5ec42d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Flexor tendon</topic><topic>gap</topic><topic>magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>ultrasound</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Renfree, Kevin J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dahiya, Nirvikar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kransdorf, Mark J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Nan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Karan A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drace, Patricia A.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Renfree, Kevin J.</au><au>Dahiya, Nirvikar</au><au>Kransdorf, Mark J.</au><au>Zhang, Nan</au><au>Patel, Karan A.</au><au>Drace, Patricia A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative Accuracy of 1.5T MRI, 3T MRI, and Static Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Small Gaps in Repaired Flexor Tendons: A Cadaveric Study</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.)</jtitle><addtitle>J Hand Surg Am</addtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>287</spage><epage>294</epage><pages>287-294</pages><issn>0363-5023</issn><eissn>1531-6564</eissn><abstract>We hypothesized that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would more accurately diagnose small gaps (<6 mm) after flexor tendon repair than static ultrasound (US) and that suture artifact would negatively impair accuracy.
A laceration of the flexor digitorum profundus was created in 160 fresh-frozen cadaveric digits and randomized to either an intact repair (0-mm gap) or repairs using a locked 4-strand suture repair with either 4-0 Prolene, Ethibond, or and gaps of 2, 4,or 6 mm; or no suture in which 2-, 4-, or 6-mm gaps were created without a suture crossing the repair site. We performed 1.5T and 3T MRI and static US studies; gap widths were estimated by radiologists blinded to suture presence and true gap widths.
The 1.5 and 3.0T MRI had a lower mean error than US for gap sizes 0 and 2 mm. All 3 modalities performed similarly for 4- and 6-mm gaps. Documentation of imaging artifact worsened error, and odds of seeing artifacts were 1.72 higher with MRI than with US. Suture did not worsen artifact nor impair accuracy for any of the 3 modalities. When no suture was used, all 3 modalities significantly overestimated the true gap.
MRI is most accurate for small gaps less than 4 mm. Although all modalities overestimated gap sizes in specimens with a 0-mm gap (intact tendon repair), mean overestimation (<2 mm) was not clinically relevant. Ultrasound overestimated 2-mm gaps (clinically intact repairs), whereas MRIs did not. We recommend MRI for evaluation of gaps after flexor tendon repair. The 1.5T has slightly better sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing clinically intact (gap < 3 mm) from clinically impaired (gap > 3 mm) repairs than the 3T.
Accurate diagnosis of intact repairs or small gaps (<3 mm) might prevent unnecessary exploration or allow modification of rehabilitation protocols. Diagnosis of clinically relevant gaps (3–6 mm) may allow for earlier revision surgery before significant tendon retraction and adhesions develop, possibly necessitating a staged reconstruction.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>33451904</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.10.031</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0363-5023 |
| ispartof | The Journal of hand surgery (American ed.), 2021-04, Vol.46 (4), p.287-294 |
| issn | 0363-5023 1531-6564 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2478595162 |
| source | ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Flexor tendon gap magnetic resonance imaging ultrasound |
| title | Comparative Accuracy of 1.5T MRI, 3T MRI, and Static Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Small Gaps in Repaired Flexor Tendons: A Cadaveric Study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T07%3A45%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20Accuracy%20of%201.5T%20MRI,%203T%20MRI,%20and%20Static%20Ultrasound%20in%20Diagnosis%20of%20Small%20Gaps%20in%20Repaired%20Flexor%20Tendons:%20A%20Cadaveric%20Study&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20hand%20surgery%20(American%20ed.)&rft.au=Renfree,%20Kevin%20J.&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=287&rft.epage=294&rft.pages=287-294&rft.issn=0363-5023&rft.eissn=1531-6564&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.10.031&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2478595162%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2478595162&rft_id=info:pmid/33451904&rft_els_id=S0363502320306821&rfr_iscdi=true |