Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka City University, Abeno-ku, Osaka, Japan.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Miyakojima-ku, Osaka, Japan.
Am J Sports Med. 2020 Mar;48(4):853-860. doi: 10.1177/0363546520904680.
Although the sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of primary meniscal tears are high, these values are lower for the assessment of healing status of repaired menisci.
To compare the accuracy of MRI T2 mapping and conventional MRI in assessing meniscal healing after repair.
Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.
Patients who underwent meniscal repair with concurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction between 2012 and 2016 and had a follow-up second-look arthroscopy were enrolled. The patients were divided into healed and incompletely/not healed groups based on the second-look arthroscopy findings. For the repaired menisci, the following were compared between the groups, (1) Stoller and Crues classification on conventional MRI with a proton density-weighted fat-saturated sequence and (2) the remaining colored meniscal tear line on T2 mapping coincident with the high signal line showing the primary tear on conventional MRI were compared. The change of T2 relaxation time (ΔT2) of the colored meniscal tear line pre- to postoperatively was compared between the groups. The mean T2 relaxation time of the whole area of the postoperative meniscus at each slice was also compared with that of control menisci to assess the whole quality of the repaired meniscus.
A total of 26 menisci from 24 knees were assessed (16 healed menisci, 10 incompletely/not healed menisci). According to the Crues classification on conventional MRI, 8 of 16 healed menisci and 3 of 10 incompletely/not healed menisci improved from grade 3 to 2, with there being no significant difference between the groups ( = .43). However, the colored meniscal tear line remained in only 3 of the 16 healed menisci as compared with 9 of the 10 incompletely/not healed menisci, and the presence of this colored line allowed differentiation between healed menisci and incompletely/not healed menisci (sensitivity, 81.3%; specificity, 90.0%; odds ratio, 39.0; = .001). The mean (SD) ΔT2 was -31.1 ± 3.2 and -19.9 ± 4.4 ms in the healed and incompletely/not healed groups, respectively ( < .001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed a cutoff ΔT2 value of -22.3 ms for separation of meniscal healing ( < .001). The T2 relaxation times of the whole area of the repaired menisci were 31.7 ± 3.4 and 32.8 ± 3.8 ms in the healed and incompletely/unhealed groups, respectively ( = .69), with these values being significantly longer than the 26.9 ± 2.2 ms in the controls ( < .001).
MRI T2 mapping allowed the differentiation of healing status after meniscal repair, with high sensitivity and specificity as compared with conventional MRI.
磁共振成像(MRI)对原发性半月板撕裂的诊断具有较高的灵敏度和特异性,但对于评估修复半月板的愈合状态,这些值则较低。
比较 MRI T2 映射与常规 MRI 评估半月板修复后愈合情况的准确性。
队列研究(诊断);证据水平,2 级。
纳入 2012 年至 2016 年间接受半月板修复术并行同期前交叉韧带重建术且有随访性二次关节镜检查的患者。根据二次关节镜检查结果,将患者分为愈合组和未愈合/未完全愈合组。对于修复的半月板,比较两组间(1)质子密度加权脂肪饱和序列常规 MRI 上的 Stoller 和 Crues 分级和(2)与常规 MRI 上显示原发性撕裂的高信号线一致的 T2 映射上残留的彩色半月板撕裂线。比较两组间术前至术后彩色半月板撕裂线的 T2 弛豫时间(ΔT2)变化。还比较了每个切片术后半月板的整个区域的平均 T2 弛豫时间与对照半月板,以评估修复半月板的整体质量。
共评估了 24 个膝关节的 26 个半月板(16 个愈合半月板,10 个未愈合/未完全愈合半月板)。根据常规 MRI 上的 Crues 分级,16 个愈合半月板中有 8 个和 10 个未愈合/未完全愈合半月板中有 3 个从 3 级改善为 2 级,两组间无显著差异( =.43)。然而,与 10 个未愈合/未完全愈合半月板中的 9 个相比,只有 3 个愈合半月板中仍存在彩色半月板撕裂线,这使得可以区分愈合半月板和未愈合/未完全愈合半月板(灵敏度,81.3%;特异性,90.0%;优势比,39.0; =.001)。愈合组和未愈合/未完全愈合组的平均(SD)ΔT2 值分别为-31.1 ± 3.2 和-19.9 ± 4.4 ms( <.001)。受试者工作特征曲线分析显示,T2 弛豫时间的截断值为-22.3 ms 时可区分半月板愈合( <.001)。愈合组和未愈合/未完全愈合组修复半月板的整个区域的 T2 弛豫时间分别为 31.7 ± 3.4 和 32.8 ± 3.8 ms( =.69),这些值明显长于对照组的 26.9 ± 2.2 ms( <.001)。
与常规 MRI 相比,MRI T2 映射可区分半月板修复后的愈合状态,具有较高的灵敏度和特异性。