Cited by 84Osteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesHip disorders and treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Clinical Utility and Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Identification of Early and Advanced Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Open access
Quatman, Carmen E., Hettrich, Carolyn M., Schmitt, Laura C., Spindler, Kurt P.·2011·The American Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Background: Current diagnostic strategies for detection of structural articular cartilage abnormalities, the earliest structural signs of osteoarthritis, often do not capture the condition until it is too far advanced for the most potential benefit of noninvasive interventions. Purpose: To systematically review the literature relative to the following questions: (1) Is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) a valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable instrument to identify knee articular cartilage abnormalities compared with arthroscopy? (2) Is MRI a sensitive tool that can be utilized to identify early cartilage degeneration? Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic search was performed in November 2010 using PubMed MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), SPORTDiscus (from 1985), SCOPUS (from 1996), and EMBASE (from 1974) databases. Results: Fourteen level I and 13 level II studies were identified that met inclusion criteria and provided information related to diagnostic performance of MRI compared with arthroscopic evaluation. The diagnostic performance of MRI demonstrated a large range of sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies. The sensitivity for identifying articular cartilage abnormalities in the knee joint was reported between 26% and 96%. Specificity and accuracy were reported between 50% and 100% and between 49% and 94%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for identifying early osteoarthritis were reported between 0% and 86%, 48% and 95%, and 5% and 94%, respectively. As a result of inconsistencies between imaging techniques and methodological shortcomings of many of the studies, a meta-analysis was not performed, and it was difficult to fully synthesize the information to state firm conclusions about the diagnostic performance of MRI. Conclusion: There is evidence in some MRI protocols that MRI is a relatively valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable clinical tool for identifying articular cartilage degeneration. Because of heterogeneity of MRI sequences, it is not possible to make definitive conclusions regarding its global clinical utility for guiding diagnosis and treatment strategies. Clinical Relevance: Traumatic sports injuries to the knee may be significant precursor events to early onset of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Magnetic resonance imaging may aid in early identification of structural injuries to articular cartilage as evidenced by articular cartilage degeneration grading.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0363546511407612

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 94

  1. 10.1002/art.1780290816 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Altman RD, 2010, Am J Manag Care, S41
  3. 10.1055/s-2007-1015453 · DOI
  4. 10.1007/s003300050646 · DOI
  5. Blackburn WD, 1994, J Rheumatol, 21, 675
  6. 10.1053/joca.1999.0303 · DOI
  7. 10.2214/ajr.172.4.10587150 · DOI
  8. 10.2214/ajr.162.1.8273700 · DOI
  9. 10.1148/radiology.203.2.9114112 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/BF00198391 · DOI
  11. 10.1148/rg.311105084 · DOI
  12. 10.1007/BF00241832 · DOI
  13. 10.2214/ajr.169.4.9308475 · DOI
  14. 10.2214/ajr.167.1.8659356 · DOI
  15. 10.2214/ajr.165.2.7618561 · DOI
  16. 10.1148/radiology.215.3.r00jn20846 · DOI
  17. 10.1148/radiol.2451060990 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/s00330-002-1557-1 · DOI
  19. 10.1148/radiol.2322030976 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/art.20489 · DOI
  21. 10.1177/03635465990270041301 · DOI
  22. Ficat RP, 1979, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 144, 55
  23. 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.11.015 · DOI
  24. 10.2214/ajr.168.2.9016245 · DOI
  25. 10.1007/s00167-003-0393-4 · DOI
  26. 10.2214/ajr.163.3.8079858 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.arthro.2008.10.020 · DOI
  28. 10.1007/BF00431036 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/jmri.20276 · DOI
  30. 10.1123/jpah.6.5.638 · DOI
  31. 10.1016/0720-048X(95)00681-F · DOI
  32. 10.1016/0749-8063(92)90062-G · DOI
  33. 10.1016/0749-8063(90)90092-R · DOI
  34. 10.1002/mrm.10424 · DOI
  35. 10.1148/radiology.183.3.1584944 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.02.001 · DOI
  37. 10.3928/0147-7447-20000601-13 · DOI
  38. 10.1148/radiol.2401050077 · DOI
  39. 10.1148/radiol.2503080822 · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.1148/radiol.2511081133 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1148/radiol.09091011 · DOI
  42. 10.1148/radiol.2523090028 · DOI
  43. 10.1097/00004728-199403000-00009 · DOI
  44. 10.2174/1874325000802010019 · DOI
  45. 10.1002/art.23176 · DOI
  46. 10.1002/1529-0131(199805)41:5<778::AID-ART4>3.0.CO;2-V · DOI
  47. 10.1002/jmri.1059 · DOI
  48. 10.3109/02841851003662772 · DOI
  49. 10.1177/036354659602400512 · DOI
  50. 10.1016/j.crad.2009.07.008 · DOI
  51. 10.1177/0363546507307396 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1002/art.20589 · DOI
  53. 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.136 · DOI
  54. 10.1055/s-2007-972835 · DOI
  55. Macarini L, 2003, Radiol Med, 105, 296
  56. 10.1136/bjsm.2009.069526 · DOI
  57. 10.2106/00004623-198264030-00022 · DOI
  58. 10.1002/jor.1100130603 · DOI
  59. 10.1007/s00256-003-0635-z · DOI
  60. 10.1016/S0730-725X(99)00033-8 · DOI
  61. 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199908)10:2<178::AID-JMRI11>3.0.CO;2-W · DOI
  62. 10.1007/s002560100330 · DOI
  63. 10.1259/0007-1285-65-776-662 · DOI
  64. 10.1186/1752-2897-2-4 · DOI
  65. 10.1007/s00167-005-0013-6 · DOI
  66. 10.1177/036354658901700410 · DOI
  67. 10.1016/S0049-0172(03)00082-9 · DOI
  68. 10.1016/j.joca.2004.12.005 · DOI
  69. 10.1016/S0749-8063(05)80090-8 · DOI
  70. 10.1097/00003086-197507000-00024 · DOI
  71. Portney LG, 2009, Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice
  72. 10.2106/00004623-199809000-00005 · DOI
  73. 10.1148/radiology.198.1.8539380 · DOI
  74. 10.1007/BF00364038 · DOI
  75. 10.1148/radiology.193.2.7972759 · DOI
  76. 10.1148/radiology.201.3.8939241 · DOI
  77. 10.2214/ajr.169.4.9308470 · DOI
  78. 10.2214/ajr.184.6.01841744 · DOI
  79. Shahriaree H, 1985, Contemp Orthop, 11, 27
  80. 10.2214/ajr.179.5.1791159 · DOI
  81. 10.1177/036354659101900414 · DOI
  82. 10.1302/0301-620X.75B1.8421033 · DOI
  83. 10.1002/jmri.1880060608 · DOI
  84. 10.1007/BF01565475 · DOI
  85. 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.12.027 · DOI
  86. 10.1186/1471-2474-11-75 · DOI
  87. 10.1258/la.2007.06041e · DOI
  88. 10.1148/radiol.2471070688 · DOI
  89. 10.1002/art.21388 · DOI
  90. 10.1007/s00256-009-0683-0 · DOI
  91. 10.1097/01.blo.0000167670.03197.c2 · DOI
  92. 10.1097/BLO.0b013e31802c9098 · DOI · Paper page
  93. 10.1002/jmri.20193 · DOI
  94. 10.1136/ard.2009.113100 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Quatman, C. E., Hettrich, C. M., Schmitt, L. C., & Spindler, K. P.
Affiliations
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Quatman, Carmen E.
Venue
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
Published
2011-07
Volume
39
Issue
7
Pages
1557-1568
ISSN
  • 0363-5465 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3365
OpenAlex
W2079792507
Cited by
84
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (R01AR056259, R01AR053684)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hip disorders and treatments
Keywords
magnetic resonance imaging, articular cartilage degeneration, early osteoarthritis detection, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, post-traumatic osteoarthritis, sports injuries
MeSH terms
Cartilage Diseases, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Osteoarthritis, Knee

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review