Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Apr;43(4):475-83.
doi: 10.1007/s00256-013-1780-7. Epub 2014 Jan 18.

The quantification of glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder instability; MR-arthro compared to 3D-CT

Affiliations
Comparative Study

The quantification of glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder instability; MR-arthro compared to 3D-CT

Jeroen E Markenstein et al. Skeletal Radiol. 2014 Apr.

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to investigate if magnetic resonance imaging with intra-articular contrast (MR-arthro) is as reliable as three-dimensionally reconstructed computed tomography imaging (3D-CT) in quantifying the glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior shoulder instability.

Materials and methods: Thirty-five patients were included. Sagittal MR-arthro and 3D-CT images of the glenoid surface were obtained pre-operatively. Two observers measured these images twice with OsiriX software in a randomized and blinded way. The intraclass correlations (ICC) of the intra- and inter-observer reliability within one method and an additional Bland-Altman plot for calculating agreement between the two methods were obtained.

Results: The joint estimates of the intra-observer reliability, taking into account the data from both observer A and B, for 3D-CT and MR-arthro were good to excellent. The intra-observer reliability was 0.938 (95% CI: 0.879, 0.968) for 3D-CT and 0.799 (95% CI: 0.639, 0.837) for MR-arthro. The inter-observer reliability between the two observers within one method (3D-CT or MR-arthro) was moderate to good. 3D-CT: 0.724 (95% CI: 0.236, 0.886) and MR-arthro: 0.534 (95% CI: 0.128, 0.762). Comparing both the 3D-CT and MR-arthro method, a Bland-Altman plot showed satisfying differences with the majority of outcomes (89%) within 1 SD.

Conclusions: Good to excellent intra- and moderate to good inter-observer correlations and a satisfying Bland-Altman plot when compared to 3D-CT show tendencies that MR-arthro is reliable and valid for measuring bony defects of the glenoid.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Chir Organi Mov. 2005 Apr-Jun;90(2):145-52 - PubMed
    1. Arthroscopy. 2000 Oct;16(7):677-94 - PubMed
    1. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60 - PubMed
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 May;85(5):878-84 - PubMed
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978 Jan;60(1):1-16 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources