Abstract
Objective
Significant differences between magnetic resonance imaging reports and intraoperative findings at the time of hip arthroscopy were documented in our practice. We sought to examine the accuracy of radiological reporting of hip pathology based on the training level of the reporting radiologist.
Materials and methods
A retrospective review of hip arthroscopies carried out between July 2008 and June 2009 identified 61 cases where original MRI scans had been reported by general community radiologists. These scans were then reviewed by musculoskeletal specialist radiologists who were blinded to both the original report and the surgical findings. Accuracy of both subsets of radiologists was compared to arthroscopic findings with regard to labral, acetabular, femoral and impingement lesions.
Results
Musculoskeletal radiologists performed better than community radiologists in terms of overall accuracy. Accuracy rates for MSK radiologists were 85, 79, 59, and 82% for labral, acetabular chondrosis, and femoral chondrosis and impingement lesions, respectively. Whereas accuracy rates for community radiologists were 70, 28, 52, and 59% (p values = 0.08, <0.001, 0.59, <0.001). Accuracy was significantly improved for both groups of radiologists when MR arthrograms were reviewed rather than conventional MRIs.
Conclusions
This study establishes the relationship between accuracy of reporting and the training level of the performing radiologists.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Edwards DJ, Lomas D, Villar RN. Diagnosis of the painful hip by magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995;77(3):374–6.
Hong RJ, Hughes TH, Gentili A, Chung CB. Magnetic resonance imaging of the hip. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27(3):435–45.
Mintz DN, Hooper T, Connell D, Buly R, Padgett DE, Potter HG. Magnetic resonance imaging of the hip: detection of labral and chondral abnormalities using noncontrast imaging. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(4):385–93.
Freedman BA, Potter BK, Dinauer PA, Giuliani JR, Kuklo TR, Murphy KP. Prognostic value of magnetic resonance arthrography for Czerny stage II and III acetabular labral tears. Arthroscopy. 2006;22(7):742–7.
Petersilge CA, Haque MA, Petersilge WJ, Lewin JS, Lieberman JM, Buly R. Acetabular labral tears: evaluation with MR arthrography. Radiology. 1996;200(1):231–5.
Czerny C, Hofmann S, Neuhold A, Tschauner C, Engel A, Recht MP, et al. Lesions of the acetabular labrum: accuracy of MR imaging and MR arthrography in detection and staging. Radiology. 1996;200(1):225–30.
Czerny C, Hofmann S, Urban M, Tschauner C, Neuhold A, Pretterklieber M, et al. MR arthrography of the adult acetabular capsular-labral complex: correlation with surgery and anatomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(2):345–9.
Leunig M, Werlen S, Ungersbock A, Ito K, Ganz R. Evaluation of the acetabular labrum by MR arthrography. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(2):230–4.
Chan YS, Lien LC, Hsu HL, Wan YL, Lee MS, Hsu KY, et al. Evaluating hip labral tears using magnetic resonance arthrography: a prospective study comparing hip arthroscopy and magnetic resonance arthrography diagnosis. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(10):1250.
Keeney JA, Peelle MW, Jackson J, Rubin D, Maloney WJ, Clohisy JC. Magnetic resonance arthrography versus arthroscopy in the evaluation of articular hip pathology. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:163–9.
Garcea G, Mahmoud A, Ong SL, Rees Y, Berry DP, Dennison AR. Caveat reporting in ultrasound interpretation of surgical pathology: a comparison of sonographer versus radiologist. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010.
Effect of directed training on reader performance for CT colonography: multicenter study. Radiology. 2007;242(1):152–61.
Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB. Operator dependence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization. Radiology. 2006;241(2):355–65.
van Vliet EP, Hermans JJ, De Wever W, Eijkemans MJ, Steyerberg EW, Faasse C, et al. Radiologist experience and CT examination quality determine metastasis detection in patients with esophageal or gastric cardia cancer. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(11):2475–84.
Theodoropoulos JS, Andreisek G, Harvey EJ, Wolin P. Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography of the shoulder: dependence on the level of training of the performing radiologist for diagnostic accuracy. Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39(7):661–7.
Outerbridge RE. The etiology of chondromalacia patellae. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1961;43-B:752–7.
Konan SRF, Meermans G, Witt J, Haddad FS. Validation of the classification system for acetabular chondral lesions identified at arthroscopy in patients with femoroacetabular impingement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(3):332–6.
Schmid MR, Notzli HP, Zanetti M, Wyss TF, Hodler J. Cartilage lesions in the hip: diagnostic effectiveness of MR arthrography. Radiology. 2003;226(2):382–6.
Zlatkin MB, Pevsner D, Sanders TG, Hancock CR, Ceballos CE, Herrera MF. Acetabular labral tears and cartilage lesions of the hip: indirect MR arthrographic correlation with arthroscopy–a preliminary study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(3):709–14.
Kassarjian A, Yoon LS, Belzile E, Connolly SA, Millis MB, Palmer WE. Triad of MR arthrographic findings in patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology. 2005;236(2):588–92.
Mosher TJ. Musculoskeletal imaging at 3 T: current techniques and future applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2006;14(1):63–76.
Mitchell B, McCrory P, Brukner P, O'Donnell J, Colson E, Howells R. Hip joint pathology: clinical presentation and correlation between magnetic resonance arthrography, ultrasound, and arthroscopic findings in 25 consecutive cases. Clin J Sport Med. 2003;13(3):152–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McGuire, C.M., MacMahon, P., Byrne, D.P. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrography of the hip is dependent on specialist training of the radiologist. Skeletal Radiol 41, 659–665 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-011-1266-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-011-1266-4