Ebru YILMAZ, Tuğrul ÖRMECİ, Sibel Çağlar ATACAN, Berrin EROK, Doğus DOĞAN, Ayhan YILMAZ, Mahir MAHİROĞULLARI

Rotator Manset Lezyonlarında Ultrasonografi Bulgularının Manyetik Rezonans Görüntüleme Sonuçları İle Karsılastırılması

Amaç: Omuz ağrısı sikayetiyle basvuran hastalarda manyetik rezonans görüntüleme (MR) ile ultrasonografi(US) bulgularını karsılastırarak rotator manset lezyonlarında ultrasonografinin etkinliğiniarastırdık.Gereç-Yöntem: Omuz MR'ı çekilen 58 hastaya MR sonuçları görülmeden omuz ultrasonografisi yapıldı.US bulguları MR sonuçları ile karsılastırılarak US'nin omuz ağrısı olan olgularda rotator mansetlezyonlarındaki duyarlılık ve özgüllük değerleri arastırıldı. İnfraspinatus ve subskapularis patolojilerisayıca yetersiz olup istatistiksel analiz güvenilirliğinin düsük olması nedeniyle sadece supraspinatuspatolojileri değerlendirilmistirBulgular: US ve MR bulguları karsılastırıldığında supraspinatus tendonu tam kat yırtıklarında US'ninduyarlılık ve özgüllüğü %95, parsiyel yırtıklarında duyarlılığı %71,özgüllüğü ise %98, supraspinatustendinosis vakalarında duyarlılığı %82,özgüllüğü ise %93' tür. .Sonuç: US invaziv olmayan,ucuz,kolay ulasılabilen bir görüntüleme yöntemidir.Özellikle supraspinatuspatolojisi düsünülen vakalarda yüksek duyarlılık ve özgüllük değerleri ile ilk görüntüleme yöntemiUS olmalıdır.

Comparison of the Ultrasound Findings with Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Rotator Cuff Lesions

Aim: We searched the efficacy of ultrasound (US) for rotator cuff lesions by comparing the ultrasound findings with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) results in patients with shoulder pain. Materials-Metods: Blinded to MRI results ;shoulder US was performed to 58 patients who had undergone MRI.MRI results were compared to US findings in patients with shoulder pain and rotator cuff pathologies. Results: In the supraspinatus tendon;for full-thickness tears the sensitivity and specificity of US was %95,for partial tears the sensitivity was 71% and the specificity was 98%,for supraspinatus tendinosis the sensitivity was 82%,the specificity was 95%. We could not do reliable statistical analysis becouse of insufficiant number of infraspinatus and subscapularis pathologies and so we evaluated only supraspinatus pathologies. Conclusion: US is an non-invaziv ,cheap and easly accessible imaging metod.Especially for the cases who we think that they have a supraspinatus pathologies the first imaging metod should be US due to its high sensitivity and specificity.

PDF

___

1. D.Stoller,Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Orthopaedics and SportsMedicine,Lipincott Williams-Wilkins,3rd edition,2007;1324-1364
2. Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K. Shoulder sonography. State of the art. Radiol Clin North Am. Jul 1999;37(4):767-85
3. Seltzer SE, Finberg HJ, Weissman BN, Kido DK, Collier BD: Arthrosonography: Gray-scale ultrasound evaluation of the shoulder. Radiology 1979;132: 467-468
4. FM Hall, DI Rosenthal, RP Goldberg, and G Wyshak. A prospective study was performed to assess patient discomfort after shoulder arthrography,AJR Am J Roentgenol 1981;136:59
5. Wiener SN, Seitz WH Jr. Sonography of the shoulder in patients with tears of the rotator cuff: accuracy and value for selecting surgical options. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Jan 1993;160(1):103-7; discussion
6. Hollister MS, Mack LA,Pattern RM; Association of sonographically detected subacromial/subdeltoid bursal effusion and intraarticular fluid with rotator cuff tear.AJR 1995;165:605-608
7. C.Rumack, Diagnostic Ultrasound, 3rd edition, 2005;898-900
8. Crass JR,Craig EV,Feinberg SB: Ultrasonography of rotator cuff tears:A review of 500 diagnostic cuffs.J Clin Ultrasound 1988;16:313-327
9. Brandt TD, Cardone BW, Grant TH, et al. Rotator cuff sonography: a reassessment. Radiology. Nov 1989;173(2):323-7
10. Mack LA, Gannon MK, Kilcoyne RF, Matson FA 3rd. Sonographic evaluation of the rotator cuff. Accuracy in patients without prior surgery. Clin Orthop. Sep 1988;(234):21-7
11. Soble MG, Kaye AD, Guay RC. Rotator cuff tear: clinical experience with sonographic detection. Radiology. Nov 1989;173(2):319-21
12. Geoff Hide,Shoulder,Rotator cuff injury (ultrasonography),e-medicine
13. Teefey SA, Hasan SA, Middleton WD, et al. Ultrasonography of the rotator cuff. A comparison of ultrasonographic and arthroscopic findings in one hundred consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Apr 2000;82(4):498-504
14. Teefey SA, Middleton WD, Yamaguchi K. Shoulder sonography. State of the art. Radiol Clin North Am. Jul 1999; 37(4): 767-85
15. Van Holsbeeck MT, Kolowich PA, Eyler WR, et al. US depiction of partialthickness tear of the rotator cuff. Radiology. Nov 1995;197(2):443-6.
16. Naqvi GA, Jadaan M, Harrington P. Accuracy of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging for detection of full thickness rotator cuff tears. Int J Shoulder Surg. 2009 Oct-Dec; 3(4): 94-97
17. Roy JS,Braen C,Leplond J,et al. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography, MRI and MR arthrography in the characterisation of rotator cuff disorders: a meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine Br J Sports Med doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014- 094148
18. Tefeey SA, Petersen B,Prather H,et al. Shoulder Ultrasound vs MRI for Rotator Cuff Pathology. Physical medicine and Rehabilitation .2009 May;1:490-495.