4.2 Article

Prediction of Chronicity of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear Using MRI Findings

Journal

CLINICS IN ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 19-25

Publisher

KOREAN ORTHOPAEDIC ASSOC
DOI: 10.4055/cios.2013.5.1.19

Keywords

Anterior cruciate ligament; Chronicity; Magnetic resonance imaging; Predictive model

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The estimation of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear is required in certain cases involving legal and financial administration, such as the worker's compensation and/or insurance. The aim of this study is to propose and evaluate a quantitative evaluation instrument to estimate the chronicity of the ACL tear, based on the four magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. Methods: One hundred and fifty one cases of complete ACL tear confirmed by arthroscopy were divided into 4 groups according to the time from ACL injury to MRI acquisition: acute (< 6 weeks), subacute (6 weeks to 3 months), intermediate (3 months to 1 year), and chronic (> 1 year). The four MRI findings including ACL morphology, joint effusion, posterior cruciate ligament angle, and bone bruise were analyzed for temporal changes among the 4 groups. Binary logistic regression equations were formulated using the MRI findings to estimate the chronicity of ACL tear in a quantitative manner, and the accuracy of the formulated regression equations was evaluated. Results: The four MRI findings showed substantial temporal correlation with the time-limits of ACL injury to be included in the estimation model. Three predictive binary logistic equations estimated the probability of the ACL injury for the three cutoff time-limits of 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year with accuracies of 82.1%, 89.4%, and 89.4%, respectively. Conclusions: A series of predictive logistic equations were formulated to estimate the chronicity of ACL tear using 4 MRI findings with chronological significance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available