Learning curve of office-based ultrasonography for rotator cuff tendons tears
- 450 Downloads
To compare the accuracy of ultrasonography and MR arthrography (MRA) imaging in detecting of rotator cuff tears with arthroscopic finding used as the reference standard.
The ultrasonography and MRA findings of 51 shoulders that underwent the arthroscopic surgery were prospectively analysed. Two orthopaedic doctors independently performed ultrasonography and interpreted the findings at the office. The tear size measured at ultrasonography and MRA was compared with the size measured at surgery using Pearson correlation coefficients (r). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and false-positive rate were calculated for a diagnosis of partial-and full-thickness rotator cuff tears. The kappa coefficient was calculated to verify the inter-observer agreement.
The sensitivity of ultrasonography and MRA for detecting partial-thickness tears was 45.5 and 72.7 %, and that for full-thickness tears was 80.0 and 100 %, respectively. The accuracy of ultrasonograpy and MRA for detecting partial-thickness tears was 45.1 and 88.2 %, and that for full-thickness tears was 82.4 and 98 %, respectively. Tear size measured based on ultrasonography examination showed a poor correlation with the size measured at arthroscopic surgery (r = 0.21; p < 0.05). However, tear size estimated by MRA showed a strong correlation (r = 0.75; p < 0.05). The kappa coefficient was 0.47 between the two independent examiners.
The accuracy of office-based ultrasonography for beginner orthopaedic surgeons to detect full-thickness rotator cuff tears was comparable to that of MRA but was less accurate for detecting partial-thickness tears and torn size measurement. Inter-observer agreement on the interpretation was fair. These results highlight the importance of the correct technique and experience in operation of ultrasonography in shoulder joint.
Level of evidence
Diagnostic study, Level II.
KeywordsRotator cuff tear Ultrasonography Accuracy Partial tear
Conflict of interest
There was no external funding source in this investigation.
- 2.Co S, Bhalla S, Rowan K, Aippersbach S, Bicknell S (2011) Comparison of 2-and 3-Dimensional shoulder ultrasound to magnetic resonance imaging in a community hospital for the detection of supraspinatus rotator cuff tears with improved worktime room efficiency. Can Assoc Radiol J. doi: 101016/jcarj201102003 PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Singisetti K, Hinsche A (2011) Shoulder ultrasonography versus arthroscopy for the detection of rotator cuff tears: analysis of errors. J Orthop Surg 19(1):76–79Google Scholar
- 12.Sipola P, Niemitukia L, Kröger H, Höfling I, Väätäinen U (2010) Detection and quantification of rotator cuff tears with ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging—A prospective study in 77 consecutive patients with a surgical reference. Ultrasound Med Biol 36(12):1981–1989CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Teefey SA, Rubin DA, Middleton WD, Hildebolt CF, Leibold RA, Yamaguchi K (2004) Detection and quantification of rotator cuff tears. Comparison of ultrasonographic, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopic findings in seventy-one consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A(4):708–716PubMedGoogle Scholar