Skip to main content
Log in

Magnetic resonance tomography of the knee joint

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in terms of sensitivity and specificity using a field strength of <1.0 T (T) versus ≥1.5 T for diagnosing or ruling out knee injuries or knee pathologies.

Methods

The systematic literature research revealed more than 10,000 references, of which 1598 abstracts were reviewed and 87 full-text articles were retrieved. The further selection process resulted in the inclusion of four systematic reviews and six primary studies.

Results

No differences could be identified in the diagnostic performance of low- versus high-field MRI for the detection or exclusion of meniscal or cruciate ligament tears. Regarding the detection or grading of cartilage defects and osteoarthritis of the knee, the existing evidence suggests that high-field MRI is tolerably specific but not very sensitive, while there is literally no evidence for low-field MRI because only a few studies with small sample sizes and equivocal findings have been performed.

Conclusions

We can recommend the use of low-field strength MRI systems in suspected meniscal or cruciate ligament injuries. This does, however, not apply to the diagnosis and grading of knee cartilage defects and osteoarthritis because of insufficient evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bryan S, Bungay HP, Weatherburn G, Field S. Magnetic resonance imaging for investigation of the knee joint: a clinical and economic evaluation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:222–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Oei EHG, Nikken JJ, Verstijnen ACM, Ginai AZ, Hunink MG. MR imaging of the menisci and cruciate ligaments: a systematic review. Radiology. 2003;226:817–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tavernier T, Cotten A. High- versus low-field MR imaging. Radiol Clin N Am. 2005;43:673–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Masciocchi C, Barile A, Satragno L. Musculoskeletal MRI: dedicated systems. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:250–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nikken JJ, Oei EHG, Ginai AZ, et al. Acute peripheral joint injury: cost and effectiveness of low-field-strength MR imaging—results of randomized controlled trial. Radiology. 2005;236:958–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sanal HT, Cardoso F, Chen L, Chung C. Office-based versus high-field strength MRI. diagnostic and technical considerations. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2009;17:31–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Puig S, Felder-Puig R. Evidenzbasierte Radiologie: Ein neuer Ansatz zur Bewertung von klinisch angewandter radiologischer Diagnostik und Therapie. Fortschr Roentgenstr. 2006;178:671–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. The Evidence-Based Radiology Working Group. Evidence-based radiology: a new approach to the practice of radiology. Radiology. 2006;220:586–75.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Smith TO, Lewis M, Song F, Toms AP, Donell ST, Hing CB. The diagnostic accuracy of anterior cruciate ligament rupture using magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Traumatol. 2012;22:315–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Harris JD, Brophy RH, Jia G, et al. Sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging for detection of patellofemoral articular cartilage defects. Arthroscopy. 2012;11:1728–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Quatman CE, Hettrich CM, Schmitt LC, Spindler KP. The clinical utility and diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging for identification of early and advanced knee osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39:1557–67.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Whiting P, Rutjes AWS, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PMM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:25.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ahn JM, Kwak SM, Kang HS, et al. Evaluation of patellar cartilage in cadavers with a low-field-strength extremity-only magnet: comparison of MR imaging sequences, with macroscopic findings as the standard. Radiology. 1998;208:57–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bredella MA, Losasso C, Moelleken SC, Huegli RW, Genant HK, Tirman PF. Three-point Dixon chemical-shift imaging for evaluating articular cartilage defects in the knee joint on a low-field-strength open magnet. AJR. 2001;177:1371–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Harman M, Ipeksoy U, Dogan A, Arslan H, Etlik O. MR arthrography in chondromalacia patellae diagnosis on a low-field open magnet system. J Clin Imag. 2003;27:194–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kladny B, Glückert K, Swoboda B, Beyer W, Weseloh G. Comparison of low-field (0.2 Tesla) and high-field (1.5 Tesla) magnetic resonance imaging of the knee joint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1995;114:281–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kreitner K-F, Hansen M, Schadmand-Fischer S, Krummenauer F, Runkel M. Niederfeld-MR-Tomographie des Kniegelenkes: ergebnisse einer prospektiven, arthroskopisch kontrollierten Studie. Fortschr Roentgenstr. 1999;170:35–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Riel K-A, Reinisch M, Kersting-Sommerhoff HN, Merl T. 0.2-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging of internal lesions of the knee joint: a prospective arthroscopically controlled clinical study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Athrosc. 1999;7:37–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ghazinoor S, Crues JV, Crowley C. Low-field musculoskeletal MRI. J Magn Res Imag. 2007;25:234–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Krampla W, Rosel M, Svoboda K, Nachbagauer A, Gschwantler M, Hruby W. MRI of the knee: how do field strength and radiologist’s experience influence diagnostic accuracy and interobserver correlation in assessing chondral and meniscal lesions and the integrity of the anterior cruciate ligament? Eur Radiol. 2009;19:1519–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Strickland CD, Kijowski R. Morphologic imaging of articular cartilage. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2011;19:229–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Crawford R, Walley G, Bridgman S, Maffulli N. Magnetic resonance imaging versus arthroscopy in the diagnosis of knee pathology, concentrating on meniscal lesions and ACL tears: a systematic review. Br Med Bull. 2007;84:5–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Chen HN, Dong QR, Wang Y. Accuracy of low-field MRI on meniscal tears. GRM. 2014;13:4267–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was funded by the Main Association of Austrian Social Insurance Institutions.

Conflicts of interests

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Puig.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 56 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Puig, S., Kuruvilla, Y.C.K., Ebner, L. et al. Magnetic resonance tomography of the knee joint. Skeletal Radiol 44, 1427–1434 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2178-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2178-5

Keywords

Navigation