The diagnostic performance of MRI signs to distinguish Pectoralis major tendon avulsions from Myotendinous injuries

Background Management of pectoralis major (PM) injuries is largely determined by the anatomic location of the injury, with tendon avulsions from the humerus requiring surgery while myotendinous (MT) injuries are typically managed non-operatively. Because physical examination cannot reliably make thi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Skeletal radiology 2021-12, Vol.50 (12), p.2395-2404
Hauptverfasser: Baker, Jonathan C., Pacheco, Rafael A., Bansal, Danesh, Shah, Veer A., Rubin, David A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2404
container_issue 12
container_start_page 2395
container_title Skeletal radiology
container_volume 50
creator Baker, Jonathan C.
Pacheco, Rafael A.
Bansal, Danesh
Shah, Veer A.
Rubin, David A.
description Background Management of pectoralis major (PM) injuries is largely determined by the anatomic location of the injury, with tendon avulsions from the humerus requiring surgery while myotendinous (MT) injuries are typically managed non-operatively. Because physical examination cannot reliably make this distinction, MRI is often used for staging. However, correct classification can also be difficult with MRI where there is extensive soft tissue edema and distorted anatomy. Objective To determine the diagnostic performance of primary and secondary MRI signs of PM injury for distinguishing tendon avulsions from MT injuries in a selected sample of patients that underwent surgical repair using a practical interpretation algorithm. Methods In this retrospective study, 3 blinded observers independently assessed the MRI findings of 17 patients with PM injury (including 12 acute injuries, 4 chronic, and 1 of uncertain age) where subsequent surgery documented tendon avulsion (11) and MT injuries (6) by applying the primary MRI criteria of absent tendon at the humerus, retracted tendon stump, epicenter of edema, and the secondary finding of soft tissue edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex. Operative findings were used as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were recorded for each finding. Results The primary MRI finding of lack of a visible tendon at the insertion (sensitivity 82–100%, specificity 100%) and the secondary finding of edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex (sensitivity 64–91%, specificity 67–100%) were both useful for the distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury, particularly in acute injuries. The presence of a retracted tendon stump and the epicenter of edema were not reliable findings. The use of a decision tree including the secondary finding of humeral edema increased the sensitivity and specificity for 2 of the 3 observers. Conclusion MRI assessment of PM injury focused on the humeral insertion of the PM tendon allows accurate distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury. Clinical impact This study describes a practical approach to classifying PM injuries with MRI to distinguish injuries that require surgery from those that can potentially be managed conservatively.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s00256-021-03794-9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2526306758</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A731361358</galeid><sourcerecordid>A731361358</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3ca6e78933f8c2cddf74aa0e16fffcaba31da68d99cd9de4a744f713984574ce3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhoNY7LX6B1xIwI2bsfmaZGZZih-Flhap65BmTqa5zCTXnBmh_97c3mrBhasszvO-vOEh5B1nnzhj5hQZE61umOANk6ZXTf-CbLiSohFc85dkw6RWjZCqOyavEbeMcWNa_YocS9l3gku2IXh7D3SIbkwZl-jpDkrIZXbJA82BXn2_oBjHhHTJFatIGteI9_QG_JKLmyLS2W1zoQukISfqfq0TxlwDoeSZXj3k_SGmvCKNabuWCPiGHAU3Ibx9ek_Ijy-fb8-_NZfXXy_Ozy4br5hcGumdBtP1UobOCz8MwSjnGHAdQvDuzkk-ON0Nfe-HfgDljFLB8Po11RrlQZ6Qj4feXck_V8DFzhE9TJNLUPdY0QotmTZtV9EP_6DbvJZU11WqU1oJZdQzNboJbEwhL8X5fak9M5JLzeVjlzhQvmTEAsHuSpxdebCc2b04exBnqzj7KM72NfT-acB6N8PwN_LHVAXkAcB6SiOU54X_qf0NqSmkuQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2584642474</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The diagnostic performance of MRI signs to distinguish Pectoralis major tendon avulsions from Myotendinous injuries</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Baker, Jonathan C. ; Pacheco, Rafael A. ; Bansal, Danesh ; Shah, Veer A. ; Rubin, David A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Baker, Jonathan C. ; Pacheco, Rafael A. ; Bansal, Danesh ; Shah, Veer A. ; Rubin, David A.</creatorcontrib><description>Background Management of pectoralis major (PM) injuries is largely determined by the anatomic location of the injury, with tendon avulsions from the humerus requiring surgery while myotendinous (MT) injuries are typically managed non-operatively. Because physical examination cannot reliably make this distinction, MRI is often used for staging. However, correct classification can also be difficult with MRI where there is extensive soft tissue edema and distorted anatomy. Objective To determine the diagnostic performance of primary and secondary MRI signs of PM injury for distinguishing tendon avulsions from MT injuries in a selected sample of patients that underwent surgical repair using a practical interpretation algorithm. Methods In this retrospective study, 3 blinded observers independently assessed the MRI findings of 17 patients with PM injury (including 12 acute injuries, 4 chronic, and 1 of uncertain age) where subsequent surgery documented tendon avulsion (11) and MT injuries (6) by applying the primary MRI criteria of absent tendon at the humerus, retracted tendon stump, epicenter of edema, and the secondary finding of soft tissue edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex. Operative findings were used as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were recorded for each finding. Results The primary MRI finding of lack of a visible tendon at the insertion (sensitivity 82–100%, specificity 100%) and the secondary finding of edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex (sensitivity 64–91%, specificity 67–100%) were both useful for the distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury, particularly in acute injuries. The presence of a retracted tendon stump and the epicenter of edema were not reliable findings. The use of a decision tree including the secondary finding of humeral edema increased the sensitivity and specificity for 2 of the 3 observers. Conclusion MRI assessment of PM injury focused on the humeral insertion of the PM tendon allows accurate distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury. Clinical impact This study describes a practical approach to classifying PM injuries with MRI to distinguish injuries that require surgery from those that can potentially be managed conservatively.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0364-2348</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-2161</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00256-021-03794-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33982130</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Classification ; Decision trees ; Diagnostic systems ; Edema ; Humans ; Humerus ; Imaging ; Injuries ; Insertion ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Medical diagnosis ; Medical research ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Medicine, Experimental ; Nuclear Medicine ; Observers ; Orthopedics ; Pathology ; Patients ; Pectoralis Muscles ; Radiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Scientific Article ; Soft tissues ; Surgery ; Tendon Injuries - diagnostic imaging ; Tendons</subject><ispartof>Skeletal radiology, 2021-12, Vol.50 (12), p.2395-2404</ispartof><rights>ISS 2021</rights><rights>2021. ISS.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 Springer</rights><rights>ISS 2021.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3ca6e78933f8c2cddf74aa0e16fffcaba31da68d99cd9de4a744f713984574ce3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3ca6e78933f8c2cddf74aa0e16fffcaba31da68d99cd9de4a744f713984574ce3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6078-612X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00256-021-03794-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00256-021-03794-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33982130$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Baker, Jonathan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pacheco, Rafael A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bansal, Danesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shah, Veer A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rubin, David A.</creatorcontrib><title>The diagnostic performance of MRI signs to distinguish Pectoralis major tendon avulsions from Myotendinous injuries</title><title>Skeletal radiology</title><addtitle>Skeletal Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Skeletal Radiol</addtitle><description>Background Management of pectoralis major (PM) injuries is largely determined by the anatomic location of the injury, with tendon avulsions from the humerus requiring surgery while myotendinous (MT) injuries are typically managed non-operatively. Because physical examination cannot reliably make this distinction, MRI is often used for staging. However, correct classification can also be difficult with MRI where there is extensive soft tissue edema and distorted anatomy. Objective To determine the diagnostic performance of primary and secondary MRI signs of PM injury for distinguishing tendon avulsions from MT injuries in a selected sample of patients that underwent surgical repair using a practical interpretation algorithm. Methods In this retrospective study, 3 blinded observers independently assessed the MRI findings of 17 patients with PM injury (including 12 acute injuries, 4 chronic, and 1 of uncertain age) where subsequent surgery documented tendon avulsion (11) and MT injuries (6) by applying the primary MRI criteria of absent tendon at the humerus, retracted tendon stump, epicenter of edema, and the secondary finding of soft tissue edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex. Operative findings were used as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were recorded for each finding. Results The primary MRI finding of lack of a visible tendon at the insertion (sensitivity 82–100%, specificity 100%) and the secondary finding of edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex (sensitivity 64–91%, specificity 67–100%) were both useful for the distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury, particularly in acute injuries. The presence of a retracted tendon stump and the epicenter of edema were not reliable findings. The use of a decision tree including the secondary finding of humeral edema increased the sensitivity and specificity for 2 of the 3 observers. Conclusion MRI assessment of PM injury focused on the humeral insertion of the PM tendon allows accurate distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury. Clinical impact This study describes a practical approach to classifying PM injuries with MRI to distinguish injuries that require surgery from those that can potentially be managed conservatively.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Decision trees</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Edema</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Humerus</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Injuries</subject><subject>Insertion</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Medicine, Experimental</subject><subject>Nuclear Medicine</subject><subject>Observers</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Pathology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pectoralis Muscles</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Scientific Article</subject><subject>Soft tissues</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Tendon Injuries - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Tendons</subject><issn>0364-2348</issn><issn>1432-2161</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhoNY7LX6B1xIwI2bsfmaZGZZih-Flhap65BmTqa5zCTXnBmh_97c3mrBhasszvO-vOEh5B1nnzhj5hQZE61umOANk6ZXTf-CbLiSohFc85dkw6RWjZCqOyavEbeMcWNa_YocS9l3gku2IXh7D3SIbkwZl-jpDkrIZXbJA82BXn2_oBjHhHTJFatIGteI9_QG_JKLmyLS2W1zoQukISfqfq0TxlwDoeSZXj3k_SGmvCKNabuWCPiGHAU3Ibx9ek_Ijy-fb8-_NZfXXy_Ozy4br5hcGumdBtP1UobOCz8MwSjnGHAdQvDuzkk-ON0Nfe-HfgDljFLB8Po11RrlQZ6Qj4feXck_V8DFzhE9TJNLUPdY0QotmTZtV9EP_6DbvJZU11WqU1oJZdQzNboJbEwhL8X5fak9M5JLzeVjlzhQvmTEAsHuSpxdebCc2b04exBnqzj7KM72NfT-acB6N8PwN_LHVAXkAcB6SiOU54X_qf0NqSmkuQ</recordid><startdate>20211201</startdate><enddate>20211201</enddate><creator>Baker, Jonathan C.</creator><creator>Pacheco, Rafael A.</creator><creator>Bansal, Danesh</creator><creator>Shah, Veer A.</creator><creator>Rubin, David A.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6078-612X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211201</creationdate><title>The diagnostic performance of MRI signs to distinguish Pectoralis major tendon avulsions from Myotendinous injuries</title><author>Baker, Jonathan C. ; Pacheco, Rafael A. ; Bansal, Danesh ; Shah, Veer A. ; Rubin, David A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3ca6e78933f8c2cddf74aa0e16fffcaba31da68d99cd9de4a744f713984574ce3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Decision trees</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Edema</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Humerus</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Injuries</topic><topic>Insertion</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Medicine, Experimental</topic><topic>Nuclear Medicine</topic><topic>Observers</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Pathology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pectoralis Muscles</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Scientific Article</topic><topic>Soft tissues</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Tendon Injuries - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Tendons</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Baker, Jonathan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pacheco, Rafael A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bansal, Danesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shah, Veer A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rubin, David A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Skeletal radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Baker, Jonathan C.</au><au>Pacheco, Rafael A.</au><au>Bansal, Danesh</au><au>Shah, Veer A.</au><au>Rubin, David A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The diagnostic performance of MRI signs to distinguish Pectoralis major tendon avulsions from Myotendinous injuries</atitle><jtitle>Skeletal radiology</jtitle><stitle>Skeletal Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Skeletal Radiol</addtitle><date>2021-12-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2395</spage><epage>2404</epage><pages>2395-2404</pages><issn>0364-2348</issn><eissn>1432-2161</eissn><abstract>Background Management of pectoralis major (PM) injuries is largely determined by the anatomic location of the injury, with tendon avulsions from the humerus requiring surgery while myotendinous (MT) injuries are typically managed non-operatively. Because physical examination cannot reliably make this distinction, MRI is often used for staging. However, correct classification can also be difficult with MRI where there is extensive soft tissue edema and distorted anatomy. Objective To determine the diagnostic performance of primary and secondary MRI signs of PM injury for distinguishing tendon avulsions from MT injuries in a selected sample of patients that underwent surgical repair using a practical interpretation algorithm. Methods In this retrospective study, 3 blinded observers independently assessed the MRI findings of 17 patients with PM injury (including 12 acute injuries, 4 chronic, and 1 of uncertain age) where subsequent surgery documented tendon avulsion (11) and MT injuries (6) by applying the primary MRI criteria of absent tendon at the humerus, retracted tendon stump, epicenter of edema, and the secondary finding of soft tissue edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex. Operative findings were used as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were recorded for each finding. Results The primary MRI finding of lack of a visible tendon at the insertion (sensitivity 82–100%, specificity 100%) and the secondary finding of edema contacting the anterior humeral cortex (sensitivity 64–91%, specificity 67–100%) were both useful for the distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury, particularly in acute injuries. The presence of a retracted tendon stump and the epicenter of edema were not reliable findings. The use of a decision tree including the secondary finding of humeral edema increased the sensitivity and specificity for 2 of the 3 observers. Conclusion MRI assessment of PM injury focused on the humeral insertion of the PM tendon allows accurate distinction of tendon avulsion from MT injury. Clinical impact This study describes a practical approach to classifying PM injuries with MRI to distinguish injuries that require surgery from those that can potentially be managed conservatively.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>33982130</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00256-021-03794-9</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6078-612X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0364-2348
ispartof Skeletal radiology, 2021-12, Vol.50 (12), p.2395-2404
issn 0364-2348
1432-2161
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2526306758
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects Algorithms
Classification
Decision trees
Diagnostic systems
Edema
Humans
Humerus
Imaging
Injuries
Insertion
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Medical diagnosis
Medical research
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Medicine, Experimental
Nuclear Medicine
Observers
Orthopedics
Pathology
Patients
Pectoralis Muscles
Radiology
Retrospective Studies
Scientific Article
Soft tissues
Surgery
Tendon Injuries - diagnostic imaging
Tendons
title The diagnostic performance of MRI signs to distinguish Pectoralis major tendon avulsions from Myotendinous injuries
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-18T09%3A22%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20diagnostic%20performance%20of%20MRI%20signs%20to%20distinguish%20Pectoralis%20major%20tendon%20avulsions%20from%20Myotendinous%20injuries&rft.jtitle=Skeletal%20radiology&rft.au=Baker,%20Jonathan%20C.&rft.date=2021-12-01&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2395&rft.epage=2404&rft.pages=2395-2404&rft.issn=0364-2348&rft.eissn=1432-2161&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00256-021-03794-9&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA731361358%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2584642474&rft_id=info:pmid/33982130&rft_galeid=A731361358&rfr_iscdi=true