Suppr超能文献

基于证据的临床检查、超声和 MRI 在诊断拇指掌指关节尺侧副韧带撕裂中的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Evidence-based use of clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI for diagnosing ulnar collateral ligament tears of the metacarpophalangeal joint of the thumb: systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 North Caroline Street, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.

Nuffield Orthopedic Center, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

Eur Radiol. 2021 Aug;31(8):5699-5712. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07666-z. Epub 2021 Jan 18.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To determine the performances of clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI for diagnosing non-displaced and displaced ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tears.

METHODS

Based on a literature search of Medline, ISI Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus between January 1990 and December 2019, all published original articles which met the inclusion criteria were included. We determined the pooled sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI using a meta-analysis based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies with 519 subjects reporting diagnostic performances of clinical examination (8), ultrasonography (12), and MRI (5) met the inclusion criteria. For ruling out UCL tears, the pooled sensitivities were similarly high for clinical examination (97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93-99%)), ultrasonography (96% (95% CI, 94-98%)), and MRI (99% (95% CI, 92-100%)) (p = 0.3). For ruling in UCL tears, the pooled specificities were higher for MRI (100% (95% CI, 87-100%)) when compared to ultrasonography (91% (95% CI, 86-95%)) (p = 0.1) and clinical examination (85% (95% CI, 78-91%)) (p = 0.04). For the diagnosis of displaced UCL tears, MRI had a higher specificity (92% (95% CI, 73-99%)) than ultrasonography (72% (95% CI, 63-80%)) (p = 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI have similarly high sensitivities for ruling out UCL tears in patients presenting with a thumb injury. MRI and ultrasonography have high specificities to confirm the presence of suspected UCL tears. MRI performs best for differentiating non-displaced from displaced UCL tears.

KEY POINTS

• Clinical examination followed by ultrasonography is the most appropriate test for ruling out ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tears of the thumb. • MRI and ultrasonography both have high specificities to confirm the presence of a suspected UCL tear. • MRI outperforms ultrasonography for differentiating non-displaced from displaced UCL tears.

摘要

目的

确定体格检查、超声和 MRI 对诊断非移位和移位尺侧副韧带 (UCL) 撕裂的表现。

方法

根据 1990 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月期间 Medline、ISI Web of Science、Embase 和 Scopus 的文献检索,纳入符合纳入标准的所有已发表的原始文章。我们根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目-诊断测试准确性 (PRISMA-DTA) 指南,使用荟萃分析确定体格检查、超声和 MRI 的汇总敏感性、特异性和准确性。

结果

共有 17 项研究纳入 519 名报告体格检查(8 项)、超声(12 项)和 MRI(5 项)诊断表现的患者,符合纳入标准。对于 UCL 撕裂的排除诊断,体格检查(97%(95%置信区间 [CI],93-99%))、超声(96%(95% CI,94-98%))和 MRI(99%(95% CI,92-100%))的汇总敏感性相似(p = 0.3)。对于 UCL 撕裂的纳入诊断,与超声(91%(95% CI,86-95%))(p = 0.1)和体格检查(85%(95% CI,78-91%))相比,MRI 的汇总特异性更高(100%(95% CI,87-100%))(p = 0.04)。对于移位 UCL 撕裂的诊断,MRI 的特异性(92%(95% CI,73-99%))高于超声(72%(95% CI,63-80%))(p = 0.2)。

结论

体格检查、超声和 MRI 对诊断拇指受伤患者 UCL 撕裂的排除诊断具有相似的高敏感性。MRI 和超声具有较高的特异性来确认疑似 UCL 撕裂的存在。MRI 最适合区分非移位和移位 UCL 撕裂。

关键点

  • 对于 UCL 撕裂的排除诊断,体格检查后进行超声检查是最适当的检查。

  • MRI 和超声都具有较高的特异性来确认疑似 UCL 撕裂的存在。

  • MRI 在区分非移位和移位 UCL 撕裂方面优于超声。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验