A comparison of clinical estimation, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopy in determining the size of rotator cuff tears

111Citations
Citations of this article
102Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This prospective study was undertaken to compare the ability of clinical estimation, diagnostic ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopy to estimate the size of rotator cuff tears. Estimates of rotator cuff tear size were compared with the findings at open operation in 33 consecutive patients with a presumptive diagnosis of rotator cuff tear. Arthroscopy estimates of rotator cuff tear size correlated best with actual tear size (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.92; P < .001). Magnetic resonance imaging (r = 0.74; P < .001). Estimates of rotator cuff tear size after clinical assessment alone had weaker correlation coefficients (r = 0.41; P = .02) than the other methods. Each method underestimated rotator cuff tear size by 12%, 30%, 33%, and 38%, respectively. No method was able to determine the size of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (r < 0.02).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bryant, L., Shnier, R., Bryant, C., & Murrell, G. A. C. (2002). A comparison of clinical estimation, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopy in determining the size of rotator cuff tears. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 11(3), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2002.121923

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free