Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This retrospective study assessed whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confers a diagnostic or therapeutic advantage over clinical examination in managing thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries and evaluated its accuracy in lesion characterization.</p> Materials and methods <p>We reviewed 96 patients undergoing surgical repair over a ten-year period, 43 of whom had preoperative MRI and 53 who did not.</p> Results <p>While MRI exhibited high sensitivity (97%) and specificity (80%) for detecting UCL pathology, its accuracy for differentiating lesion subtypes was only moderate (72–84%). No appreciable difference was noted between MRI and non-MRI cohorts in the proportion of indication-appropriate (57% vs. 45%) or surgeries potentially amenable to conservative treatment (43% vs. 55%).</p> Conclusions <p>Thus, MRI did not influence the indication for surgery beyond what was determined by a meticulous physical examination. A thorough clinical assessment remains the mainstay, reserving MRI for diagnostically challenging scenarios or when detailed anatomical visualization is necessary.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The accuracy of MRI diagnosis of thumb ulnar collateral ligament injuries over physical examination in clinical decision-making for surgery

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月24日

查看全文
  • Nicolas Orbenes,
  • Philipp Moog,
  • Klaus Woertler,
  • Jan Neumann,
  • Hans-Guenther Machens,
  • Haydar Kükrek

摘要

Purpose

This retrospective study assessed whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) confers a diagnostic or therapeutic advantage over clinical examination in managing thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries and evaluated its accuracy in lesion characterization.

Materials and methods

We reviewed 96 patients undergoing surgical repair over a ten-year period, 43 of whom had preoperative MRI and 53 who did not.

Results

While MRI exhibited high sensitivity (97%) and specificity (80%) for detecting UCL pathology, its accuracy for differentiating lesion subtypes was only moderate (72–84%). No appreciable difference was noted between MRI and non-MRI cohorts in the proportion of indication-appropriate (57% vs. 45%) or surgeries potentially amenable to conservative treatment (43% vs. 55%).

Conclusions

Thus, MRI did not influence the indication for surgery beyond what was determined by a meticulous physical examination. A thorough clinical assessment remains the mainstay, reserving MRI for diagnostically challenging scenarios or when detailed anatomical visualization is necessary.