Background
Methods
FAI | #1 “femoracetabular impingement” [MeSH Terms] #2 “femoracetabular” [All Fields] AND “impingement” [All Fields]) OR “femoracetabular impingement” [All Fields] OR “femoroacetabular” [All Fields] AND “impingement” [All Fields]) OR “femoroacetabular impingement” [All Fields] |
Hip joint | #3 “hip joint”[MeSH Terms] OR (“hip” [All Fields] AND “joint” [All Fields]) OR “hip joint” [All Fields] #4 chondral [All Fields] OR “cartilage” [MeSH Terms] OR “cartilage” [All Fields] #5 labral [All Fields] OR acetabular [All Fields] AND labrum [All Fields] |
MRI | #6 “magnetic resonance imaging” [MeSH Terms] OR (“magnetic” [All Fields] AND “resonance” [All Fields] AND “imaging” [All Fields]) OR “magnetic resonance imaging” [All Fields] #7 (“magnetic resonance spectroscopy” [MeSH Terms] OR (“magnetic” [All Fields] AND “resonance” [All Fields] AND “spectroscopy” [All Fields]) OR “magnetic resonance spectroscopy” [All Fields] OR (“magnetic” [All Fields] AND “resonance” [All Fields]) OR “magnetic resonance” [All Fields]) AND (“arthrography” [MeSH Terms] OR “arthrography” [All Fields]) |
Accuracy of MRI | #8 (“sensitivity and specificity” [MeSH Terms] OR (“sensitivity” [All Fields] AND “specificity” [All Fields]) OR “sensitivity and specificity” [All Fields] OR (“sensitivity” [All Fields] AND “specificity” [All Fields]) OR “sensitivity specificity” [All Fields]) AND accuracy [All Fields] #9 (true [All Fields] AND positive [All Fields]) OR (true [All Fields] AND negative [All Fields]) OR (false [All Fields] AND positive [All Fields]) OR (false [All Fields] AND negative [All Fields]) |
Search strategy | ((#1 AND #2) AND (#3 OR #4 OR #5)) AND ((#6 OR #7) OR (#8 OR #9)) |
Last search | 17th of May 2016 |
Eligibility criteria
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Study identification
-
0.9 – 1.0 excellent
-
0.8 – 0.9 very good
-
0.7 – 0.8 good
-
0.6 – 0.7 sufficient
-
0.5 – 0.6 bad
-
<0.5 test not useful
Results
Qualitative analysis
Study demographics
Study | Country | Number of cases | Mean age (years) | MR procedure | Lesion analyzed | Sensitivity (percent) | Specificity (percent) | TP (n) | FP (n) | FN (n) | TN (n) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anderson, L. A. 2009 [17] | USA | 27 | N/S |
dMRA
|
Acetabular chondral delamination
| 22 | 100 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 18 |
Bittersohl, B. 2011 [40] | Switzerland | 16 | 31 |
iMRA 1.5 T (morphologic)
|
Combined chondral lesions
| 57 | 88 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 8 |
iMRA 1.5 T (dGEMRIC)
|
Combined chondral lesions
| 75 | 33 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 3 | ||||
Lattanzi, R. 2014 [27] | USA | 20 | N/S | iMRA 3 T(dGEMRIC)
|
Combined chondral lesions
| 52 | 67 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S |
Lattanzi, R. 2012 [28] | USA | 10 | 19.9 |
iMRA 1.5 T (morphologic)
|
Combined chondral lesions
| 47 | 79 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S |
iMRA 1.5 T (dGEMRIC)
|
Combined chondral lesions
| 71 | 36 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | ||||
Pfirrmann, C. W. 2008 [32] | Switzerland | 44 | 30.7 (16–49) |
dMRA 1.5 T
|
Acetabular chondral delamination
| 74 | 90 | 17 | 2 | 6 | 19 |
Schmid, M. R. 2003 [15] | Switzerland | 42 | 37 | dMRA 1.0 T |
Combined chondral lesions
| 79 | 77 | 15 | 5 | 4 | 18 |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 60 | 88 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | |||||
Zaragoza, E. 2009 [16] | Canada, USA | 48 | 38.8 | dMRA 1.5 T |
Acetabular chondral delamination
| 79 | 84 | 28 | 3 | 1 | 16 |
Aprato, A. 2013 [33] | Italy | 41 | 23-25 | dMRA 1.5 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 69 | 88 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 22 |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 46 | 81 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 22 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 91 | 86 | 31 | 3 | 1 | 6 | |||||
Banks, D. B. 2012 [36] | United Kingdom | 69 | N/S | dMRA 1.5 T |
Combined chondral lesions
| 17 | 100 | 6 | 0 | 29 | 34 |
Labral lesions | 81 | 51 | 13 | 26 | 3 | 27 | |||||
Crespo Rodriguez, A. M. 2014 [37] | Spain | 51 | 43 ± 9 | dMRA 1.5 T |
Combined chondral lesions
| 92 | 54 | 37 | 5 | 3 | 6 |
Labral lesions
| 95 | 100 | 35 | 0 | 2 | 14 | |||||
Gonzalez Gil, A. B. 2015 [31] | Spain | 36 | 39 | dMRA – 3 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 78.78 | 81.81 | 11 | 4 | 3 | 18 |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 71.43 | 72.72 | 10 | 6 | 4 | 16 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 86.95 | 76.92 | 20 | 3 | 3 | 10 | |||||
James, S. L. 2006 [29] | United Kingdom, Australia | 46 | 32.3 | cMRI – 1.5 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 94 | 100 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 100 | 94 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | |||||
Labral lesions
| 100 | 100 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | |||||
McGuire, C. M. 2012 [13] | Ireland | 61 | 32 | dMRA – 1.5 T (31 cases) |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 86 | 50 | 25 | 1 | 4 | 1 |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 85 | 44 | 12 | 8 | 3 | 8 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 96 | 33 | 25 | 4 | 1 | 1 | |||||
cMRI – 1.5 T (30 cases) |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 78 | 33 | 21 | 2 | 6 | 1 | ||||
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 69 | 43 | 10 | 9 | 5 | 6 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 86 | 100 | 25 | 0 | 4 | 1 | |||||
Perdikakis, E. 2011 [30] | Greece | 14 | 43 | dMRA 1.5 T |
Combined chondral lesions
| 63 | 33 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S |
Labral lesions
| 100 | 50 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | |||||
Petchprapa, C. N. 2015 [21] | USA | 41 | 33-35 | iMRA 3 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 69 | 89 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 69 | 95 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | |||||
Labral lesions
| 89 | 99 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S | |||||
Sahin, M. 2014 [38] | Turkey | 14 | 35 | dMRA – 1.5 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 89 | 40 | 8 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 100 | 90 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 9 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 100 | 50 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 2 | |||||
Sutter, R. 2014 [12] | Switzerland | 28 | 31.8 | dMRA – 1.5 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 91 | 25 | 22 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 50 | 90 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 20 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 89 | 50 | 23 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |||||
cMRI – 1.5 T |
Acetabular chondral lesions
| 83 | 50 | 20 | 2 | 4 | 2 | ||||
Femoral head chondral lesions
| 50 | 100 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 22 | |||||
Labral lesions
| 89 | 50 | 23 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |||||
Zlatkin, M. B. 2010 [35] | USA | 14 | 39.0 | iMRA 1.5 T |
Combined chondral lesions
| 81 | 100 | 9 | 0 | 2 | 3 |
Labral lesions
| 100 | 100 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||||
cMRI 1.5 T |
Combined chondral lesions
| 81 | 100 | 9 | 0 | 2 | 3 | ||||
Labral lesions
| 84 | 100 | 11 | 0 | 2 | 1 | |||||
Reurink, G. 2012 [34] | Netherlands | 95 | 41.3 | dMRA 1.5 T |
Labral lesions
| 86 | 75 | 78 | 1 | 13 | 3 |
Studler, U. 2008 [39] | Switzerland | 57 | 35.0 | dMRA 1.5 T |
Labral lesions
| 97 | 53 | 43 | 6 | 1 | 7 |
Tian, C. Y. 2014 [14] | China | 90 | 35.1 | dMRA 3 T |
Labral lesions
| 95 | 84 | N/S | N/S | N/S | N/S |
cMRI 3 T |
Labral lesions
| 66 | 77 | 39 | 7 | 20 | 24 |
Quantitative meta-analysis
Conventional magnetic resonance imaging
Direct magnetic resonance arthrography
Indirect magnetic resonance arthrography
Discussion
Labral lesions
Chondral lesions
iMRA
Analysis | N | Sensitivity | Specificity |
---|---|---|---|
dMRA
| |||
Chondral lesions | 8 | 0.75 (95% CI: 0.69 – 0.8) | 0.866 (95% CI: 0.789 – 0.923) |
Labral lesions | 8 | 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88 – 0.94) | 0.58(95% CI: 0.48 – 0.68) |
cMRI
| |||
Chondral lesions | 3 | 0.76 (95% CI: 0.65 – 0.85) | 0.72 (95% CI: 0.57 – 0.84) |
Labral lesions | 3 | 0.864 (95% CI: 0.757 – 0.936) | 0.833 (95% CI: 0.359 – 0.996) |
iMRA
| |||
Chondral lesions | 2 | 0.722 (95% CI: 0.465 – 0.903) | 0.917 (95% CI: 0.615 – 0.998) |
Labral lesions | 2 | N/C | N/C |