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
. 2018 Feb;47(2).
doi: 10.12788/ajo.2018.0007.

Use of a Small-Bore Needle Arthroscope to Diagnose Intra-Articular Knee Pathology: Comparison With Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Use of a Small-Bore Needle Arthroscope to Diagnose Intra-Articular Knee Pathology: Comparison With Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Carl A Deirmengian et al. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2018 Feb.

Abstract

The use of arthroscopy for purely diagnostic purposes has been largely supplanted by noninvasive technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The mi-eye+TM (Trice Medical) technology is a small-bore needle unit for in-office arthroscopy. We conducted a pilot study comparing the mi-eye⁺™ unit with MRI, using surgical arthroscopy as a gold-standard reference. We hypothesized that the mi-eye⁺™ needle arthroscope, which can be used in an office setting, would be equivalent to MRI for the diagnosis of intra-articular pathology of the knee. This prospective, multicenter, observational study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. There were 106 patients (53 males, 53 females) in the study. MRIs were interpreted by musculoskeletally trained radiologists. The study was conducted in the operating room using the mi-eye⁺™ device. The mi-eye⁺™ device findings were compared with the MRI findings within individual pathologies, and a "per-patient" analysis was performed to compare the arthroscopic findings with those of the mi-eye⁺™ and the MRI. Additionally, we identified all mi-eye⁺™ findings and MRI findings that exactly matched the surgical arthroscopy findings. The mi-eye⁺™ demonstrated complete accuracy of all pathologies for 97 (91.5%) of the 106 patients included in the study, whereas MRI demonstrated complete accuracy for 65 patients (61.3%) (P < .0001). All discrepancies between mi-eye⁺TM and arthroscopy were false-negative mi-eye⁺™ results, as the mi-eye⁺TM did not reveal some aspect of the knee's pathology for 9 patients. The mi-eye⁺™ was more sensitive than MRI in identifying meniscal tears (92.6% vs 77.8%; P = .0035) and more specific in diagnosing these tears (100% vs 41.7%; P < .0001). The mi-eye⁺™ device proved to be more sensitive and specific than MRI for intra-articular findings at time of knee arthroscopy. Certainly there are contraindications to using the mi-eye⁺™, and our results do not obviate the need for MRI, but our study did demonstrate that the mi-eye⁺™ needle arthroscope can safely provide excellent visualization of intra-articular knee pathology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors' Disclosure Statement: Dr. Deirmengian reports that he receives equity, patents, and is an advisory board member for Trice Medical, which is directly related to this article. Dr. Dines, Dr. Vernace, and Dr. Schwartz report that they receive equity and are advisory board members for Trice Medical. Dr. Gladstone reports that he is a consultant and advisory board member for Trice Medical. Dr. Creighton reports no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types