Suppr超能文献

Dixon 3D FLASH 序列三维 MRI 与三维 CT 在肩袖关节炎中评估肩盂畸形的比较。

3D-MRI versus 3D-CT in the evaluation of glenoid deformity in glenohumeral arthritis using Dixon 3D FLASH sequence.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rabin Medical Center, 39 Jabutinsky Street, 4941492, Petah Tikva, Israel.

Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, 660 First Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA.

出版信息

Skeletal Radiol. 2022 Dec;51(12):2281-2289. doi: 10.1007/s00256-022-04086-6. Epub 2022 Jun 23.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare MRI with 3D reconstructions and 3D-CT with respect to assessment of glenoid wear in osteoarthritic shoulders.

METHODS

3D reconstructions were generated for CT and MR (utilizing the Dixon technique) imaging performed on 29 osteoarthritic shoulders. Two reviewers independently performed glenoid morphometric measurements and evaluated glenoid erosion. Mean differences between the two modalities were calculated. Inter-observer agreement was calculated using kappa coefficient.

RESULTS

The combined mean absolute difference (bias) in glenoid version between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was 2.7° ± 1.6° (range 0.15-7.85, P value = 0.7). The combined mean absolute difference in glenoid inclination between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was 6.8° ± 4.1° (range 0.8°-15.75°, P value = 0.17). No significant inter-reader variation in glenoid version and inclination measurements on 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was found (P > 0.05). The inter-reader reliability for both CT and MRI was high for Walch grading of glenoid bone loss (κ = 1, κ = 0.81, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

3D-MRI is comparable to 3D-CT with respect to axial glenoid bone loss, as measured by glenoid version. However, for coronal bone loss estimation, measured by glenoid inclination, 3D-CT remains the gold standard. Thus, 3D-MR can be used as an alternative for preoperative assessment of glenoid version in arthritic shoulders.

摘要

目的

比较 MRI 与 3D 重建和 3D-CT 在评估骨关节炎肩关节盂肱关节磨损方面的差异。

方法

对 29 例骨关节炎肩关节的 CT 和 MR(利用 Dixon 技术)成像进行 3D 重建。两名观察者独立进行盂肱关节形态学测量并评估盂肱关节侵蚀情况。计算两种模态之间的平均差异。使用kappa 系数计算观察者间的一致性。

结果

3D-CT 和 3D-MRI 之间盂肱关节关节面倾斜的联合平均绝对差异(偏差)为 2.7°±1.6°(范围 0.15-7.85,P 值=0.7)。3D-CT 和 3D-MRI 之间盂肱关节关节面倾斜的联合平均绝对差异为 6.8°±4.1°(范围 0.8°-15.75°,P 值=0.17)。在 3D-CT 和 3D-MRI 上,对盂肱关节关节面倾斜和倾斜度测量的无显著的观察者间差异(P>0.05)。对于 CT 和 MRI,在对盂肱关节骨丢失的 Walch 分级上,观察者间的可靠性均较高(κ=1,κ=0.81)。

结论

3D-MRI 在轴向盂肱关节骨丢失的评估方面与 3D-CT 相当,通过盂肱关节关节面倾斜进行测量。然而,对于冠状位骨丢失的评估,通过盂肱关节关节面倾斜进行测量,3D-CT 仍然是金标准。因此,3D-MRI 可作为关节炎肩关节术前盂肱关节关节面倾斜评估的替代方法。

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