Ockert B, Haasters F, Polzer H, Grote S, Kessler M A, Mutschler W, Kanz K-G
Chirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Campus Innenstadt, München, Deutschland.
Unfallchirurg. 2010 Apr;113(4):293-9. doi: 10.1007/s00113-009-1702-2.
The physical examination of the knee in cases of suspected meniscal tears serves to increase the probability of a correct diagnosis. Although there is a large variety of functional tests, the quality of each diagnostic test is controversially discussed.
Through a systematic literature search in Medline and the Cochrane Database two reviewers independently screened publications, evaluated each study for methodological quality and categorized them into levels of evidence (CEBM). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicted value, as well as positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR+/LR-) values were calculated in order to render the quality threshold of the physical examination in meniscus impairment.
The Thessaly test (sensitivity: 91%, specificity: 97%, PPV: 97%, NPV: 91% LR+: 31.1, LR-: 0.1) revealed the highest test quality. Limited quality was shown for the Mc Murray test (sensitivity: 51%, specificity: 78%, PPV: 70%, NPV: 61%, LR+: 2.3, LR-: 0.6), "joint line tenderness" (sensitivity: 64%, specificity: 61%, PPV: 62%, NPV: 63%, LR+: 1.6, LR-: 0.6), the Apley-Grinding test (sensitivity: 38%, specificity: 84%, PPV: 71%, NPV: 58%, LR+: 2.4, LR-: 0.7) and the Ege test (sensitivity: 66%, specificity: 86%, PPV: 83%, NPV: 72%, LR+: 4.7, LR-: 0.4). Evidence for Steinman's test, Bragard's test and the meniscal signs of Böhler or Payr could not be tested.
Meniscal injury can be detected by several functional tests. Using the Thessaly test can improve the physical examination by means of probability of the correct diagnosis, but the results are based on a single study. In patients with ambiguous findings in the physical examination or with suspected combined injury, further diagnostic procedures such as magnetic resonance imaging are necessary to confirm the diagnosis. In clinically certain cases the use of additional diagnostic imaging procedures should be avoided as other authors have shown that with few exceptions this has no influence on the therapy.
对疑似半月板撕裂病例的膝关节进行体格检查有助于提高正确诊断的概率。尽管有各种各样的功能测试,但每种诊断测试的质量仍存在争议。
通过在Medline和Cochrane数据库中进行系统的文献检索,两名 reviewers 独立筛选出版物,评估每项研究的方法学质量,并将其分类为证据水平(CEBM)。计算敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及阳性和阴性似然比(LR+/LR-)值,以确定半月板损伤体格检查的质量阈值。
Thessaly 试验(敏感性:91%,特异性:97%,PPV:97%,NPV:91%,LR+:31.1,LR-:0.1)显示出最高的测试质量。Mc Murray 试验(敏感性:51%,特异性:78%,PPV:70%,NPV:61%,LR+:2.3,LR-:0.6)、“关节线压痛”(敏感性:64%,特异性:61%,PPV:62%,NPV:63%,LR+:1.6,LR-:0.6)、Apley 研磨试验(敏感性:38%,特异性:84%,PPV:71%,NPV:58%,LR+:2.4,LR-:0.7)和 Ege 试验(敏感性:66%,特异性:86%,PPV:83%,NPV:72%,LR+:4.7,LR-:0.4)的质量有限。无法对 Steinman 试验、Bragard 试验以及 Böhler 或 Payr 的半月板体征进行证据测试。
半月板损伤可通过多种功能测试检测出来。使用 Thessaly 试验可通过提高正确诊断的概率来改善体格检查,但结果仅基于一项研究。对于体格检查结果不明确或疑似合并损伤的患者,需要进一步的诊断程序,如磁共振成像来确诊。在临床确诊的病例中,应避免使用额外的诊断成像程序,因为其他作者已经表明,除少数例外情况外,这对治疗没有影响。