Saremi Hossein, Seifrabiei Mohamadali
Department of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
Social Medicine Department, Community Medicine Specialist, Faculty of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
Front Surg. 2023 Mar 15;10:916694. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.916694. eCollection 2023.
In the current study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the comparison of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the techniques in diagnosing SSC tendon tears. Also, we performed a systematic review of the classification of SSC tendon tears.
English language, peer-reviewed journal publications from the first date available to March 2022 were extracted by searching PubMed and Web of Science databases. A forest plot was used to graphically show the results of pooled sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of different diagnostic modalities.
There were six studies on using MRI to diagnose subscapularis tendon tears, five studies on MRI, four studies on clinical examination, one on ultrasonography, and one on CT arthrography. Pooled sensitivity values for MRI, MRA, clinical examination, ultrasonography, and CT arthrography were 0.71 (CI: 0.54; 0.87), 0.83 (0.77; 0.88), 0.49 (0.31; 0.67), 0.39 (0.29; 0.51), and 0.90 (0.72-0.97), respectively. The pooled specificity values for MRI, MRA, clinical examination, ultrasonography, and CT arthrography were 0.93 (CI: 0.89; 0.96), 0.86 (0.75; 0.93), 0.89 (0.73; 0.96), 0.93 (0.88; 0.96), and 0.90 (0.69; 0.98), respectively. The pooled diagnostic accuracy values for MRI, MRA, clinical examination, ultrasonography, and CT arthrography were 0.84 (CI: 0.80; 0.88), 0.85 (0.77; 0.90), 0.76 (0.66; 0.84), 0.76 (0.70; 0.81), and 0.90 (0.78; 0.96), respectively.
According to our systematic review and meta-analysis, MR arthrography was the most accurate in diagnosing subscapularis tears. MR arthrography was the most sensitive, and MRI and ultrasonography were the most specific in detecting subscapularis tears.
在本研究中,我们针对诊断肩胛下肌肌腱撕裂技术的准确性、敏感性和特异性比较进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。此外,我们还对肩胛下肌肌腱撕裂的分类进行了系统评价。
通过检索PubMed和Web of Science数据库,提取从可获取的首日至2022年3月的英文、经同行评审的期刊出版物。采用森林图以图形方式展示不同诊断方式的合并敏感性、特异性和准确性结果。
有六项关于使用MRI诊断肩胛下肌肌腱撕裂的研究,五项关于MRI的研究,四项关于临床检查的研究,一项关于超声检查的研究,以及一项关于CT关节造影的研究。MRI、MRA、临床检查、超声检查和CT关节造影的合并敏感性值分别为0.71(CI:0.54;0.87)、0.83(0.77;0.88)、0.49(0.31;0.67)、0.39(0.29;0.51)和0.90(0.72 - 0.97)。MRI、MRA、临床检查、超声检查和CT关节造影的合并特异性值分别为0.93(CI:0.89;0.96)、0.86(0.75;0.93)、0.89(0.73;0.96)、0.93(0.88;0.96)和0.90(0.69;0.98)。MRI、MRA、临床检查、超声检查和CT关节造影的合并诊断准确性值分别为0.84(CI:0.80;0.88)、0.85(0.77;0.90)、0.76(0.66;0.84)、0.76(0.70;0.81)和0.90(0.78;0.96)。
根据我们的系统评价和荟萃分析,MR关节造影在诊断肩胛下肌撕裂方面最为准确。MR关节造影在检测肩胛下肌撕裂方面最敏感,而MRI和超声检查在检测肩胛下肌撕裂方面最具特异性。