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 10;14(4):298-303.
doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1719231. eCollection 2022 Oct.

Evaluating Accuracy of Plain Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Arthrogram versus Wrist Arthroscopy in the Diagnosis of Scapholunate Interosseous Ligament Injury

Nardeen Kader  1 , Mohammed Shoaib Arshad  1 , Pawan K Chajed  1 , Daoud Makki  1 , Kiran Naikoti  1 , David Temperley  1 , S Raj Murali  1
Affiliations

Evaluating Accuracy of Plain Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Arthrogram versus Wrist Arthroscopy in the Diagnosis of Scapholunate Interosseous Ligament Injury

Nardeen Kader et al. J Hand Microsurg. .

Abstract

Introduction Scapholunate interosseous ligament injury (SLIL) is the most common cause of wrist instability and a cause of morbidity in a proportion of patients with wrist injuries. Aim To evaluate the accuracy of plain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR arthrogram (MRA) in the diagnosis of SLIL injury against the existing gold standard-wrist arthroscopy. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed 108 cases by comparing MRI/MRA reports and their wrist arthroscopy operation notes. Results Overall MRI sensitivity to SLIL injuries was 38.5% (91.0% specificity). When broken down into plain MRI and MRA the results were: plain MRI sensitivity = 19.2% (91.4% specificity) and MRA sensitivity = 57.7% (90.5% specificity). Conclusion Neither MRI nor MRA scanning is sensitive enough compared with the gold standard. Positive predictive value remains too low (62.5 and 88.2%, respectively) to consider bypassing diagnostic arthroscopy and treating surgically. The negative predictive value (60.4 and 63.6%, respectively) is inadequate to confirm exclusion of injury from MRI results alone.

Keywords: arthroscopy; diagnosis; evaluation; magnetic resonance imaging; scapholunate ligament injury.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest None declared.

References

    1. Chim H, Moran S L. Wrist essentials: the diagnosis and management of scapholunate ligament injuries. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134(02):312e–322e. - PubMed
    1. Surdziel P, Lubiatowski P. Scapholunate instability: natural history, diagnostics, and therapeutic algorithm. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2006;8(02):115–121. - PubMed
    1. Mrkonjic A, Lindau T, Geijer M, Tägil M. Arthroscopically diagnosed scapholunate ligament injuries associated with distal radial fractures: a 13- to 15-year follow-up. J Hand Surg Am. 2015;40(06):1077–1082. - PubMed
    1. O'Meeghan C J, Stuart W, Mamo V, Stanley J K, Trail I A. The natural history of an untreated isolated scapholunate interosseus ligament injury. J Hand Surg [Br] 2003;28(04):307–310. - PubMed
    1. Watson H K, Ballet F L. The SLAC wrist: scapholunate advanced collapse pattern of degenerative arthritis. J Hand Surg Am. 1984;9(03):358–365. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources