School of Big Data and Fundamental Sciences, Shandong Institute of Petroleum and Chemical Technology, Dongying, China.
Department of Pharmacy, Weifang People's Hospital, Weifang, China.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Mar 3;102(9):e32963. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032963.
This study aimed to systematically evaluate the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in the diagnosis of acetabular labral tears.
Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP were electronically searched to collect relevant studies on magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of acetabular labral tears from inception to September 1, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies by using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. RevMan 5.3, Meta Disc 1.4, and Stata SE 15.0 were used to investigate the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance in patients with acetabular labral tears.
A total of 29 articles were included, involving 1385 participants and 1367 hips. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, pooled positive likelihood ratio, pooled negative likelihood ratio, pooled diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic, and Q* of MRI for diagnosing acetabular labral tears were 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.80), 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68-0.80), 2.19 (95% CI, 1.76-2.73), 0.48 (95% CI, 0.36-0.65), 4.86 (95% CI, 3.44-6.86), 0.75, and 0.69, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, pooled positive likelihood ratio, pooled negative likelihood ratio, pooled diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic, and Q* of MRA for diagnosing acetabular labral tears were 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.89), 0.64 (95% CI, 0.57-0.71), 2.23 (95% CI, 1.57-3.16), 0.21 (95% CI, 0.16-0.27), 10.47 (95% CI, 7.09-15.48), 0.89, and 0.82, respectively.
MRI has high diagnostic efficacy for acetabular labral tears, and MRA has even higher diagnostic efficacy. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, the above results should be further validated.
本研究旨在系统评估磁共振成像（MRI）和磁共振关节造影（MRA）在诊断髋臼唇撕裂中的价值。
电子检索 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、CBM、CNKI、万方数据和 VIP 等数据库，收集截至 2021 年 9 月 1 日关于 MRI 诊断髋臼唇撕裂的相关研究。由 2 位评价者独立筛选文献、提取数据，并使用诊断准确性研究质量评价工具 2 评价纳入研究的偏倚风险。使用 RevMan 5.3、Meta Disc 1.4 和 Stata SE 15.0 评估 MRI 对髋臼唇撕裂患者的诊断价值。
共纳入 29 篇文献，涉及 1385 名参与者和 1367 髋。荟萃分析结果显示，MRI 诊断髋臼唇撕裂的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比、合并诊断优势比、汇总受试者工作特征曲线下面积和 Q值分别为 0.77（95%置信区间，0.75-0.80）、0.74（95%置信区间，0.68-0.80）、2.19（95%置信区间，1.76-2.73）、0.48（95%置信区间，0.36-0.65）、4.86（95%置信区间，3.44-6.86）、0.75 和 0.69。MRA 诊断髋臼唇撕裂的合并敏感度、合并特异度、合并阳性似然比、合并阴性似然比、合并诊断优势比、汇总受试者工作特征曲线下面积和 Q值分别为 0.87（95%置信区间，0.84-0.89）、0.64（95%置信区间，0.57-0.71）、2.23（95%置信区间，1.57-3.16）、0.21（95%置信区间，0.16-0.27）、10.47（95%置信区间，7.09-15.48）、0.89 和 0.82。
MRI 对髋臼唇撕裂具有较高的诊断效能，而 MRA 的诊断效能更高。由于纳入研究的质量和数量有限，上述结果尚需进一步验证。
