Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder dislocation: a multicentric study to assess the most reliable imaging method.
Zappia, Marcello; Albano, Domenico; Aliprandi, Alberto; Barile, Antonio; Brunese, Luca; Castagna, Alessandro; Cozzolino, Andrea; De Filippo, Massimo; Di Pietto, Francesco; Di Salvatore, Mariano Giuseppe; Genovese, Eugenio Annibale; Guarino, Salvatore; Guerriero, Pasquale; Merolla, Giovanni; Messina, Carmelo; Ranieri, Riccardo; Romano, Alfonso Maria; Russo, Raffaele; Tumminello, Michele; Rossi, Pierluigi Salvo; Sconfienza, Luca Maria; Chianca, Vito.
Afiliación
  • Zappia M; Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy.
  • Albano D; Musculoskeletal Radiology Unit, Varelli Institute, Naples, Italy.
  • Aliprandi A; Campolongo Hospital, Eboli, SA, Italy.
  • Barile A; IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
  • Brunese L; Unit of Radiology, Clinical Institutes Zucchi, Monza, Monza Brianza, Italy.
  • Castagna A; Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L'Aquila, 67100, L'Aquila, Italy.
  • Cozzolino A; Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy.
  • De Filippo M; Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
  • Di Pietto F; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
  • Di Salvatore MG; Department of Public Health, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Federico II'' University, Via S. Pansini 5, Bd. 12, 80131, Naples, Italy.
  • Genovese EA; University of Parma, Parma Hospital, Via Gramsci 14, 43126, Parma, Italy.
  • Guarino S; Department of Radiology, Pineta Grande Hospital, Castel Volturno, CE, Italy.
  • Guerriero P; Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy.
  • Merolla G; Insubria University, Varese, Italy.
  • Messina C; Intermedica-Columbus, Clinical Medical Center, Milan, Italy.
  • Ranieri R; Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Dei Colli, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy.
  • Romano AM; Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy.
  • Russo R; Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Cervesi Hospital, AUSL Romagna, Cattolica, Italy.
  • Tumminello M; Doctorate School in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, UNIMORE, Modena, Italy.
  • Rossi PS; Upper Limb Surgery and Biomechanics Laboratory, AUSL Romagna, Ravenna, Italy.
  • Sconfienza LM; IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
  • Chianca V; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy.
Radiol Med ; 128(1): 93-102, 2023 Jan.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36562906
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

The aim of this multicentric study was to assess which imaging method has the best inter-reader agreement for glenoid bone loss quantification in anterior shoulder instability. A further aim was to calculate the inter-method agreement comparing bilateral CT with unilateral CT and MR arthrography (MRA) with CT measurements. Finally, calculations were carried out to find the least time-consuming method.

METHOD:

A retrospective evaluation was performed by 9 readers (or pairs of readers) on a consecutive series of 110 patients with MRA and bilateral shoulder CT. Each reader was asked to calculate the glenoid bone loss of all patients using the following

methods:

best fit circle area on both MRA and CT images, maximum transverse glenoid width on MRA and CT, CT PICO technique, ratio of the maximum glenoid width to height on MRA and CT, and length of flattening of the anterior glenoid curvature on MRA and CT. Using Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC), the following agreement values were calculated the inter-reader for each method, the inter-method for MRA with CT quantifications and the inter-method for CT best-fit circle area and CT PICO. Statistical analysis was carried out to compare the time employed by the readers for each method.

RESULTS:

Inter-reader agreement PCC mean values were the following 0.70 for MRA and 0.77 for CT using best fit circle diameter, 0.68 for MRA and 0.72 for CT using best fit circle area, 0.75 for CT PICO, 0.64 for MRA and 0.62 for CT anterior straight line and 0.49 for MRA and 0.43 for CT using length-to-width ratio. CT-MRA inter-modality PCC mean values were 0.9 for best fit circle diameter, 0.9 for best fit circle area, 0.62 for anterior straight line and 0.94 for length-to-width methods. PCC mean value comparing unilateral CT with PICO CT methods was 0.8. MRA best fit circle area method was significantly faster than the same method performed on CT (p = 0.031), while no significant difference was seen between CT and MRA for remaining measurements.

CONCLUSIONS:

CT PICO is the most reliable imaging method, but both CT and MRA can be reliably used to assess glenoid bone loss. Best fit circle area CT and MRA methods are valuable alternative measurement techniques.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Luxación del Hombro / Articulación del Hombro / Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas / Inestabilidad de la Articulación Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Radiol Med Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Luxación del Hombro / Articulación del Hombro / Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas / Inestabilidad de la Articulación Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Radiol Med Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia