From the Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center/Hospital for Joint Diseases, 660 First Ave, New York, NY 10016 (J.S.S., J.B., S.G.); Department of Radiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (N.S.); and NYU Health Sciences Library, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY (J.N.).
Radiology. 2017 Oct;285(1):101-113. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162681. Epub 2017 Jun 12.
Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic accuracies of nonenhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR arthrography for diagnosis of superior labrum anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) tears by using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials and Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed on the two main concepts of MR imaging (MR imaging, and direct and indirect MR arthrography) and SLAP tears. Inclusion criteria consisted of original studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of MR imaging, direct MR arthrography, and/or indirect MR arthrography for the detection of SLAP tears, by using surgical findings as the reference standard. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2, or QUADAS-2 Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 , tool was used to assess methodologic quality. Meta-analyses were performed that compared MR imaging studies to direct MR arthrography studies and indirect MR arthrography studies, 3-T studies to 1.5-T studies, and low-bias MR imaging studies to low-bias direct MR arthrography studies. Study variation was analyzed by using the Cochran Q test of heterogeneity and the I statistic. Results Thirty-two studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria, including 3524 imaging examinations: 1963 direct MR arthrography examinations (23 studies), 1402 MR examinations (14 studies), and 159 indirect MR arthrography examinations (three studies). Twelve studies had low risk for bias, two had questionable risk, and 18 had high risk. Mean sensitivities of direct MR arthrography, MR imaging, and indirect MR arthrography for SLAP tear diagnosis were 80.4%, 63.0%, and 74.2%, respectively. Mean specificities of direct MR arthrography, MR imaging, and indirect MR arthrography were 90.7%, 87.2%, and 66.5%, respectively. Summary receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve demonstrated superior accuracy of direct MR arthrography compared with those of MR imaging and indirect MR arthrography. Similar findings were observed in the low-bias subanalysis. Summary ROC curve demonstrated overall superiority of 3-T imaging, with or without intra-articular contrast material compared with 1.5-T imaging, with or without intra-articular contrast material. Significant variance was observed for MR imaging and direct MR arthrography (P < .001) studies for both mean sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion Direct MR arthrography appears to be more accurate than nonenhanced MR imaging for diagnosis of SLAP tears, whereas 3-T MR imaging with or without intra-articular contrast material appears to improve diagnostic accuracy compared with 1.5-T MR imaging with or without intra-articular contrast material. RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
目的 采用系统评价和 Meta 分析评估非增强磁共振成像(MR 成像)和 MR 关节造影术在诊断前上盂唇前后撕裂(SLAP 撕裂)中的诊断准确性。
材料与方法 对 MR 成像(MR 成像、直接和间接 MR 关节造影术)和 SLAP 撕裂这两个主要概念进行全面的文献检索。纳入标准包括评估 MR 成像、直接 MR 关节造影术和/或间接 MR 关节造影术对 SLAP 撕裂检测的诊断准确性的原始研究,以手术结果作为参考标准。采用诊断准确性研究的质量评估工具 2,即 QUADAS-2(诊断准确性研究的质量评估工具 2 )评估方法学质量。对直接 MR 关节造影术研究与 MR 成像研究、3-T 研究与 1.5-T 研究、低偏倚 MR 成像研究与低偏倚直接 MR 关节造影术研究进行 Meta 分析比较。采用 Cochran Q 检验和 I 统计量分析研究间的变异。
结果 32 项研究符合纳入和排除标准,共包括 3524 项影像学检查:1963 项直接 MR 关节造影术检查(23 项研究)、1402 项 MR 检查(14 项研究)和 159 项间接 MR 关节造影术检查(3 项研究)。12 项研究偏倚风险低,2 项研究偏倚风险不确定,18 项研究偏倚风险高。直接 MR 关节造影术、MR 成像和间接 MR 关节造影术诊断 SLAP 撕裂的敏感度分别为 80.4%、63.0%和 74.2%。直接 MR 关节造影术、MR 成像和间接 MR 关节造影术的特异度分别为 90.7%、87.2%和 66.5%。汇总受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线显示,直接 MR 关节造影术的诊断准确性优于 MR 成像和间接 MR 关节造影术。在低偏倚亚分析中也观察到了相似的结果。汇总 ROC 曲线显示,与 1.5-T 成像相比,无论是否使用关节内对比剂,3-T 成像(无论是否使用关节内对比剂)的总体诊断准确性更高。MR 成像和直接 MR 关节造影术研究的平均敏感度和特异度的观察值存在显著差异(P<.001)。
结论 与非增强 MR 成像相比,直接 MR 关节造影术似乎更能准确诊断 SLAP 撕裂,而与 1.5-T 成像相比,无论是否使用关节内对比剂,3-T MR 成像似乎都能提高诊断准确性。
放射学会,2017
网上补充资料可在本文的在线补充材料中获取。