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
. 2020 Dec;29(12):2654-2660.
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.05.014. Epub 2020 Jun 9.

Is the flexion-abduction-supination magnetic resonance imaging view more accurate than standard magnetic resonance imaging in detecting distal biceps pathology?

Affiliations

Is the flexion-abduction-supination magnetic resonance imaging view more accurate than standard magnetic resonance imaging in detecting distal biceps pathology?

Eva Schenkels et al. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

Background and hypothesis: Partial biceps tendon pathology is difficult to diagnose. The flexion-abduction-supination (FABS) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) view has been advocated to improve the accuracy of MRI investigation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the FABS view MRI in the diagnosis of distal biceps tendon pathology.

Methods: The study included 50 patients with surgically confirmed distal biceps tendon pathology and 50 patients with other elbow disorders. In both groups, standard elbow MRI (retrospective review of previously obtained MRI data) was performed in half of the patients whereas FABS views MRI were obtained in the other half. These were evaluated by 2 independent musculoskeletal radiologists. The sensitivity and specificity of both MRI views were determined. Tendinosis and grade of rupture were reported from MRI and then compared with surgical findings.

Results: There were no significant differences in sensitivity and specificity in detecting partial distal biceps injuries when the FABS view MRI (sensitivity, 84%; specificity, 86%) and standard MRI (sensitivity, 76%; specificity, 98%) were compared. The interobserver reliability was 92% for the FABS view MRI with biceps pathology and 68% for standard MRI. In the control group, the interobserver reliability was 88% for the FABS view MRI and 96% for standard MRI. FABS MRI was significantly better regarding grade of injury.

Conclusions: No significant differences in sensitivity and specificity were found between the FABS view and standard elbow MRI in the diagnosis of partial distal biceps tendon injuries, with high sensitivity and specificity for both views. Inter-rater reliability was better for FABS views, and FABS views were significantly more accurate than surgical findings in grading the extent of pathology.

Keywords: FABS; MRI; biceps; distal; elbow; partial; rupture; tendon.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources