Increased Accuracy of Varus Stress Radiographs Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Diagnosing Fibular Collateral Ligament Grade III Tears.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and varus stress radiographs for fibular collateral ligament (FCL) tears, and compare these modalities to intraoperative findings. METHODS: All patients who underwent an isolated FCL or combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)/FCL reconstruction by a single surgeon between 2010 and 2017 with preoperative varus stress radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were included in this study. A control group was composed of patients with an MRI and intact ACL and FCL. Sensitivity and specificity of diagnosing FCL injuries on MRI were determined based on review by a fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist, blinded to the pathology associated with each patient (FCL injury vs control), and compared with the gold standard of examination under anesthesia, followed by surgical confirmation of an FCL tear at the time of FCL reconstruction. The sensitivity of diagnosing an FCL injury based on varus stress radiographs was also determined. Furthermore, the ability of both imaging modalities to identify an FCL injury was stratified based on acute versus chronic etiology. RESULTS: A total of 232 patients were included: 98 patients in the FCL tear group (mean age: 33.6 ± 12.2 years) and 134 patients in the control group (mean age: 44.0 ± 17.2 years). Varus stress radiographs were determined to be more sensitive in diagnosing FCL injuries compared with MRI, with an overall sensitivity of 70% compared with 66%, respectively. Based on MRI, overall specificity was 68%. Based on chronicity of the injuries, MRI was more accurate for detecting acute FCL injuries than chronic injuries (P = .002), and varus stress radiographs were more accurate for detecting chronic FCL injuries than acute injuries (P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: The results support the use of both varus stress radiographs and MRI in diagnosing FCL injuries, because MRI is more sensitive in diagnosing an acute FCL tear, and varus stress radiographs are more sensitive in diagnosing a chronic FCL tear. Both imaging modalities are recommended to diagnose both acute and chronic FCL injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, case-control study.