Suppr超能文献

超声和磁共振成像在臀中肌肌腱病中的识别和鉴别诊断。

Identification and differentiation of gluteus medius tendon pathology using ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging.

机构信息

La Trobe Sports and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, La Trobe University, Bundoora, 3086, Australia.

La Trobe Sports and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, La Trobe University, Bundoora, 3086, Australia.

出版信息

Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019 Jun;41:1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.01.011. Epub 2019 Feb 7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that imaging findings play a role in directing treatment for Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome. Structural diagnoses associated with Greater Trochanter Pain Syndrome include gluteal tendinosis, and partial- or full-thickness gluteal tendon tears. However, few studies have compared imaging to confirmed tendon pathology observed during surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the ability of magnetic resonance and ultrasound imaging to identify the presence of a pathological gluteus medius tendon in comparison to surgical and histological findings.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

26 participants undergoing gluteal tendon reconstruction surgery or hip arthroplasty were included. Prior to surgery, participants underwent both magnetic resonance (MR) (n = 23) and ultrasound (US) (n = 25) imaging. A radiologist (MR) and nuclear physicians (US) classified the gluteus medius tendon as normal, tendinosis (no tear), partial-thickness tear, or full-thickness tear.

RESULTS

Ultrasound identified 17 out of the 19 pathological gluteus medius tendons correctly. However, 5 of the 6 normal tendons were incorrectly identified as exhibiting pathology on ultrasound. Magnetic resonance rated 11 out of 17 pathological tendons as abnormal, with 4 out of 6 normal tendons identified correctly. Both imaging modalities were poor at identifying and differentiating between tendinosis and partial-thickness tears.

CONCLUSION

Both imaging modalities showed a reasonable ability to identify tendon pathology. While limited by sample size, these early findings suggest that both imaging modalities may be limited in identifying specific pathoanatomical diagnoses, such as partial-thickness tears. These limitations may misdirect treatment.

摘要

背景

有人提出,影像学表现可能在指导治疗大转子疼痛综合征中发挥作用。与大转子疼痛综合征相关的结构诊断包括臀肌腱病和臀中肌腱部分或全层撕裂。然而,很少有研究将影像学与术中证实的肌腱病理进行比较。

目的

研究磁共振成像(MRI)和超声成像在识别与手术和组织学发现相关的病理性臀中肌腱的能力。

研究设计

横断面研究。

方法

纳入 26 名接受臀肌腱重建手术或髋关节置换术的患者。在手术前,所有患者均接受 MRI(n=23)和超声(n=25)检查。放射科医师(MRI)和核医学医师(US)将臀中肌腱分类为正常、肌腱病(无撕裂)、部分厚度撕裂或全厚度撕裂。

结果

超声正确识别出 19 个病理性臀中肌腱中的 17 个。然而,在超声检查中,有 5 个正常肌腱被错误地识别为存在病变。MRI 将 17 个病理性肌腱中的 11 个评为异常,6 个正常肌腱中有 4 个正确识别。两种影像学方法均难以识别和区分肌腱病和部分厚度撕裂。

结论

两种影像学方法均具有识别肌腱病变的合理能力。尽管受到样本量的限制,但这些早期发现表明,这两种影像学方法可能都难以识别特定的病理解剖学诊断,如部分厚度撕裂。这些局限性可能会导致治疗方向错误。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验