Advertisement

Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 39, Issue 12, pp 1193–1197 | Cite as

Quantitative analysis of the difference between an intact complete discoid lateral meniscus and a torn complete discoid meniscus on MR imaging: a feasibility study for a new classification

  • Mi Hee Lee
  • Sang-Hee ChoiEmail author
  • Sook Young Woo
Scientific Article

Abstract

Objective

To determine the quantitative difference between an intact complete discoid lateral meniscus (CDLM) and a torn CDLM on MR imaging.

Materials and methods

Between May 2005 to November 2009, 137 patients with a CDLM (107 intact CDLM and 30 torn CDLM) and 92 patients with a normal meniscus were included in this study. The evaluated parameters were the height of the posterior horn of the lateral and medial menisci on the sagittal images and their ratio as assessed by two observers twice at an interval of 1 month. Each parameter was analyzed based on the Kruskal Wallis test, and the analysis using the mixed model. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine the interobserver reliabilities at session 2.

Results

The mean heights of the posterior horn of the lateral and medial menisci on the sagittal images for an intact CDLM, a torn CLDM, and a normal meniscus were 6.5, 7.3, 5.7 and 6.6, 6.4, 6.7 mm at session 1, respectively. The mean heights of the posterior horn of the lateral and medial menisci on the sagittal images for an intact CDLM, a torn CDLM, and a normal meniscus for both observers were 6.5, 7.2, 5.7 and 6.6, 6.3, 6.8 mm at session 2, respectively. The ratio of the height of the lateral to the height of the medial meniscus for an intact CDLM at both sessions for both observers was 1.0. The ratios were 1.2 and 0.8 for a torn CDLM and for a normal meniscus, respectively, at both sessions for observer 1. The ratios were 1.2 and 0.9 for a torn CDLM and for a normal meniscus, respectively, at session 2 for observer 2. The heights of the posterior horn of the lateral meniscus on the sagittal images and the ratios of the heights of the lateral to the medial menisci in all three groups were statistically significantly different for both sessions (p < 0.0001). The interobserver ICCs for each parameter of both an intact CDLM and a torn CDLM at session 2 showed high correlations (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The height of the lateral meniscus and the ratio of the height of the lateral to the height of the medial meniscus for a torn CDLM were significantly higher than those for an intact CDLM.

Keywords

Complete discoid lateral meniscus Magnetic resonance imaging Height Classification 

References

  1. 1.
    Nathan PA, Cole SC. Discoid meniscus. A clinical and pathologic study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1969;64:107–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smillie IS. The congenital discoid meniscus. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 1948;30B:671–82.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Albertsson M, Gillquist J. Discoid lateral menisci: a report of 29 cases. Arthroscopy. 1988;4:211–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ikeuchi H. Arthroscopic treatment of the discoid lateral meniscus. Technique and long-term results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982;167:19–28.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Watanabe M, Takeda S. Arthroscopy of the knee joint. In: Helfet AJ, editor. Disorders of the knee. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1974. p. 145–59.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Woods GW, Whelan JM. Discoid meniscus. Clin Sports Med. 1990;9:695–706.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Araki Y, Ashikaga R, Fujii K, et al. MR imaging of meniscal tears with discoid lateral meniscus. Eur J Radiol. 1998;27:153–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ikeuchi H. Supplementary study of arthroscopic anatomy on the knee joint. Part 2: Menisci. J Jpn Orthop Assoc 1978;52:11–24.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kato Y, Oshida M, Aizawa S, Saito A, Ryu J. Discoid lateral menisci in Japanese cadaver knees. Mod Rheumatol. 2004;14:154–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Araki Y, Yamamoto H, Nakamura H, Tsukaguchi I. MR diagnosis of discoid lateral menisci of the knee. Eur J Radiol. 1994;18:92–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Connolly B, Babyn PS, Wright JG, Thorner PS. Discoid meniscus in children: magnetic resonance imaging characteristics. Can Assoc Radiol J. 1996;47:347–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stark JE, Siegel MJ, Weinberger E, Shaw DW. Discoid menisci in children: MR features. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1995;19:608–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Silverman JM, Mink JH, Deutsch AL. Discoid menisci of the knee: MR imaging appearance. Radiology. 1989;173:351–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mink JH, Reicher MA, Crues III JV. Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee. New York: Raven Press; 1987. p. 79–82.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rohren EM, Kosarek FJ, Helms CA. Discoid lateral meniscus and the frequency of meniscal tears. Skeletal Radiol. 2001;30:316–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fleissner PR, Eilert RE. Discoid lateral meniscus. Am J Knee Surg. 1999;12:125–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dickhaut SC, DeLee JC. The discoid lateral-meniscus syndrome. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 1982;64:1068–73.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scott WN. Surgery of the knee. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics. Cambridge: Harvard University; 2000.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee J, Koh D, Ong CN. Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable. Comput Biol Med. 1989;19:61–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiology and the Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.The Department of Biostatistics TeamSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations