Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Ultrasound vs MRI accuracy for meniscus tears in dogs with knee
By Franklin, Samuel P et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2017·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Comparison of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging to arthroscopy for diagnosing medial meniscal lesions in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament deficiency.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 26 dogs with cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) deficiency underwent tests to see how well ultrasonography and MRI could diagnose medial meniscal lesions, which can cause pain and limping. The results showed that ultrasonography was quite effective, with a high accuracy rate and sensitivity, meaning it was good at identifying the problem. MRI was also useful but not as reliable as ultrasonography in this case. Both imaging methods can help vets diagnose these injuries, but ultrasonography may be the better option for many dogs.
People also search for: dog limping CCL deficiency · dog knee injury diagnosis · ultrasonography vs MRI for dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the accuracy of ultrasonography and MRI for diagnosing medial meniscal lesions in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) deficiency. DESIGN Diagnostic test evaluation. ANIMALS 26 dogs (31 stifle joints) with CCL deficiency. PROCEDURES A single surgeon physically examined each dog and performed ultrasonography and arthroscopy of affected stifle joints to identify medial meniscal lesions. Video recordings of the arthroscopic procedure were saved and subsequently reviewed by the same surgeon and by a second surgeon working independently and blinded to results of all examinations. A radiologist blinded to results of all examinations evaluated MRI scans of the affected joints. Correct classification rate (CCR), sensitivity, and specificity of ultrasonography and MRI were calculated twice, with each of the 2 surgeons' arthroscopic assessments used as the reference standard. RESULTS Compared with arthroscopic examination by the unblinded surgeon, ultrasonography had a CCR of 90%, sensitivity of 95% (95% confidence interval [CI], 73% to 100%), and specificity of 82% (95% CI, 48% to 97%). For MRI, these values were 84%, 75% (51% to 90%), and 100% (68% to 100%), respectively. Compared with arthroscopic assessment by the blinded surgeon, ultrasonography had a CCR of 84%, sensitivity of 86% (95% CI, 64% to 96%), and specificity of 78% (95% CI, 40% to 96%). For MRI, these values were 77%, 68% (45% to 82%), and 100% (63% to 100%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE These data suggested imperfect performance but clinical usefulness of both ultrasonography and MRI for diagnosing medial meniscal lesions in dogs.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28621599/