Department of General Practice, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Department of Orthopaedic, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands.
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 5;10(11):e037810. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037810.
The diagnostic work-up for ligament and tendon injuries of the finger, hand and wrist consists of history taking, physical examination and imaging if needed, but the supporting evidence is limited. The main purpose of this study was to systematically update the literature for studies on the diagnostic accuracy of tests for detecting non-chronic ligament and tendon injuries of the finger, hand and wrist.
Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar ProQuest and Cinahl were searched from 2000 up to 6 February 2019 for identifying studies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 checklist, and sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were extracted.
None of the studies involved history taking. Physical examination, for diagnosing lesions of the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC), showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 58% to 90%, 20% to 69%, 56% to 73%, 53% to 71% and 55% to 65%, respectively. Physical examination in hand and finger injuries the Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranged from 88% to 99%, 75% to 100%, 34% to 88%, 91% to 100% and 75% to 95%, respectively. The accuracy of MRI with high-resolution (3 T) techniques for TFCC and interosseous ligaments of the proximal carpal row ranged from 89% to 91% and 75% to 100%, respectively. The accuracy of MRI with low-resolution (1.5 T) techniques for TFCC and interosseous ligaments of the proximal carpal row ranged from 81% to 100% and 67% to 95%, respectively.
There is limited evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of history taking and physical examination for non-chronic finger, hand and wrist ligament and tendon injuries. Although some imaging modalities seemed to be acceptable for the diagnosis of ligament and tendon injuries in the wrist in patients presenting to secondary care, there is no evidence-based advise possible for the diagnosis of non-chronic finger, hand or wrist ligament and tendon injuries in primary care.
手指、手和腕部的韧带和肌腱损伤的诊断工作包括病史采集、体格检查和必要时的影像学检查,但支持证据有限。本研究的主要目的是系统地更新有关手指、手和腕部非慢性韧带和肌腱损伤的检测方法的诊断准确性的文献。
从 2000 年至 2019 年 2 月 6 日,通过 Medline、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、Google Scholar ProQuest 和 Cinahl 搜索研究。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估清单评估方法学质量,并提取敏感性(Se)、特异性(Sp)、准确性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。
没有一项研究涉及病史采集。体格检查用于诊断三角纤维软骨复合体(TFCC)病变,其 Se、Sp、准确性、PPV 和 NPV 范围分别为 58%至 90%、20%至 69%、56%至 73%、53%至 71%和 55%至 65%。手部和手指损伤的体格检查 Se、Sp、准确性、PPV 和 NPV 范围分别为 88%至 99%、75%至 100%、34%至 88%、91%至 100%和 75%至 95%。高分辨率(3T)技术 MRI 对 TFCC 和近侧腕骨间韧带的准确性分别为 89%至 91%和 75%至 100%。低分辨率(1.5T)技术 MRI 对 TFCC 和近侧腕骨间韧带的准确性分别为 81%至 100%和 67%至 95%。
关于非慢性手指、手和腕部韧带和肌腱损伤的病史采集和体格检查的诊断准确性的证据有限。虽然一些影像学方法似乎可接受用于二级保健患者腕部韧带和肌腱损伤的诊断,但对于初级保健中非慢性手指、手或腕部韧带和肌腱损伤的诊断尚无基于证据的建议。