History, clinical findings, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopic correlation in meniscal lesions

  • Ersin ErcinEmail author
  • Ibrahim Kaya
  • Ibrahim Sungur
  • Emrah Demirbas
  • Ali Akin Ugras
  • Ercan Mahmut Cetinus



The aim of this prospective study was to compare the accuracy of clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) versus arthroscopic findings and to determine the value of an experienced examiner in clinical decision making.


A total of 30 patients with a preoperative MRI underwent arthroscopy over a 5-month period. All patients had a clinical examination performed by an experienced knee surgeon, a specialist in general orthopedics, a senior resident, and a fourth-year resident. These examiners recorded and evaluated the results of seven tests: the medial and lateral joint line tenderness test, the McMurray test, the Apley test, the Stienmann I test, the Payr’s test, Childress’ sign, and the Ege’s test. The injury was classified as a meniscal tear if there were two positive tests.

Clinical history, physical examination, and MRI findings were compared with the arthroscopic findings. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of these methods of evaluation were then calculated.


Clinical examination performed by an experienced knee surgeon had better specificity (90% vs. 60%), positive predictive value (95% vs. 83%), negative predictive value (90% vs. 86%), and diagnostic accuracy (93% vs. 83%) than MRI for medial meniscal tears. These parameters showed only a marginal difference in lateral meniscal tears. The experienced knee surgeon had better sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy parameters for medial meniscus tears in comparison with the other three examiners.


These results indicate that clinical examination by an experienced examiner using multiple meniscus tests is sufficient for a diagnosis of a meniscal tear.

Level of evidence



Knee Meniscus tears MR imaging Arthroscopy Clinical examination 


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Akseki D, Ozcan O, Boya H, Pinar H (2004) A new weight-bearing meniscal test and a comparison with McMurray’s test and joint line tenderness. Arthroscopy 20(9):951–958PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alioto RJ, Browne JE, Barnthouse CD, Scott AR (1999) The influence of MRI on treatment decisions regarding knee injuries. Am J Knee Surg 12(2):91–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boden SD, Labropoulos PA, Vailas JC (1990) MR scanning of the acutely injured knee: sensitive, but is it cost effective? Arthroscopy 6(4):306–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boeree NR, Ackroyd CE (1991) Assessment of the menisci and cruciate ligaments: an audit of clinical practice. Injury 22(4):291–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bohnsack M, Ruhmann O, Sander-Beuermann A, Wirth CJ (1999) Comparison of clinical examination with NMR spectroscopy in the diagnosis of meniscal lesions in daily practice. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 137(1):38–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bridgman S, Richards PJ, Walley G, MacKenzie G, Clement D, McCall I, Griffiths D, Maffulli N (2007) The effect of magnetic resonance imaging scans on knee arthroscopy: randomized controlled trial. Arthroscopy 23(11):1167–1173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brooks S, Morgan M (2002) Accuracy of clinical diagnosis in knee arthroscopy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84(4):265–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chang CY, Wu HT, Huang TF, Ma HL, Hung SC (2004) Imaging evaluation of meniscal injury of the knee joint: a comparative MR imaging and arthroscopic study. Clin Imaging 28(5):372–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crotty JM, Mom JUK, Pope TL (1996) Magnetic resonance imaging of the musculoskeletal system part 4. Clin Orthop Relat Res 330:288–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eren OT (2003) The accuracy of joint line tenderness by physical examination in the diagnosis of meniscal tears. Arthroscopy 19(8):850–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feller JA, Webster KE (2001) Clinical value of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee. ANZ J Surg 71(9):534–537PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jerosch J, Riemer S (2004) How good are clinical investigative procedures for diagnosing meniscus lesions? Sportverletz Sportschaden 18(2):59–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lundberg M, Odensten M, Thuomas KA, Messner K (1996) The diagnostic validity of magnetic resonance imaging in acute knee injuries with hemarthrosis. A single-blinded evaluation in 69 patients using high-field MRI before arthroscopy. Int J Sports Med 17(3):218–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miller GK (1996) A prospective study comparing the accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of meniscus tear with magnetic resonance imaging and its effect on clinical outcome. Arthroscopy 12(4):406–413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mohan BR, Gosal HS (2007) Reliability of clinical diagnosis in meniscal tears. Int Orthop 31(1):57–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Munk B, Madsen F et al (1998) Clinical magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic findings in knees: a comparative prospective study of meniscus, anterior cruciate ligament and cartilage lesions. Arthroscopy 14(2):171–175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rose NE, Gold SM (1996) A comparison of accuracy between clinical examination and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of meniscal and anterior cruciate ligament tears. Arthroscopy 12(4):398–405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ruwe PA, Wright J, Randall RL, Lynch JK, Jokl P, McCarthy S (1992) Can MR imaging effectively replace diagnostic arthroscopy? Radiology 183(2):335–339PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tria AJ Jr (2001) Clinical examination of the knee. In: Insall JN, Scott WN (eds) Surgery of the knee, vol 1, 3rd edn. Churchill Livingstone, NY, pp 161–174Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wee LL (2008) A comparison of accuracy between clinical history, physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy in the diagnosis of meniscal and anterior cruciate ligament tears. J Orthopaed 5(3):e8Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ersin Ercin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ibrahim Kaya
    • 2
  • Ibrahim Sungur
    • 2
  • Emrah Demirbas
    • 3
  • Ali Akin Ugras
    • 2
  • Ercan Mahmut Cetinus
    • 2
  1. 1.Ankara Mevki Military HospitalOrthopedics and Traumatology ClinicUnalan, IstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Haseki Training and Research HospitalOrthopedics and Traumatology ClinicIstanbulTurkey
  3. 3.Kartal Yavuz Selim HospitalOrthopedics and Traumatology ClinicIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations