Abstract
Objective
The aim of this study is to establish the sensitivity and specificity of MRA in the investigation of patients with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations.
Materials and methods
A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing both magnetic resonance arthrography and arthroscopic assessment after a traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation between January 2011 and 2014 was performed. Demographic data were collected from electronic records. Images were interpreted by 8 musculoskeletal radiologists and patients were treated by 8 consultant orthopaedic surgeons. Arthroscopic findings were obtained from surgical notes and these findings were used as a reference for MRA. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value were calculated for the different injuries.
Results
Sixty-nine patients underwent both an MRA and shoulder arthroscopy during the study period; however, clinical notes were unavailable in 9 patients. Fifty-three patients (88 %) were male, the mean age was 28 years (range 18 to 50) and 16 subjects (27 %) had suffered a primary dislocation. The overall sensitivity and specificity of MRA to all associated injuries was 0.9 (CI 0.83–0.95) and 0.94 (CI 0.9–0.96) retrospectively. The lowest sensitivity was seen in osseous Bankart 0.8 (CI 0.44–0.96) and superior labral tear (SLAP) lesions 0.5 (CI 0.14–0.86). The overall positive predictive value was 0.88 (CI 0.76–0.91) with the lowest values found in rotator cuff 0.4 (CI 0.07–0.83) and glenohumeral ligament (GHL) lesions 0.29 (CI 0.05–0.7).
Conclusion
Magnetic resonance angiography has a high sensitivity when used to identify associated injuries in shoulder dislocation, although in 8 patients (13 %) arthroscopy identified an additional injury. The overall agreement between MRA and arthroscopic findings was good, but the identification of GHL and rotator cuff injuries was poor.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The shoulder joint sacrifices stability to allow a wide range of movement. The incidence of shoulder dislocation is around 24/100,000 [1, 2] and over 90 % are anteriorly displaced [3]. The highest incidence is in young patients between 20 and 29 years of age [2] and this group of patients has the highest recurrence rate [4–7]. This has seen a change in practice with a survey of UK surgeons demonstrating a doubling of stabilisation in first-time dislocations in young patients [8]. A recent meta-analysis reported that rates of recurrent instability and shoulder function are significantly improved following surgical repair [9].
The desire of surgeons to identify any associated injuries predisposing to recurrent instability has seen a threefold increase in the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [8]. These include injuries to the humeral head, glenoid, labrum, rotator cuff, glenohumeral ligament (GHL) and superior labral tear (SLAP) lesions. Commonly described lesions include an impression fracture of the humeral head, known as a Hill–Sachs lesion [10], and damage to the glenoid labrum described by Bankart [11]. MRI is frequently used for the investigation of shoulder instability. Interpretation of the images by specialist musculoskeletal radiologists improves detection [12]. A review of MR scans post-dislocation revealed cartilaginous Bankart lesions in 73 %, osseous Bankart lesions in 27.5 %, SLAP lesions in 14 %, and Hill–Sachs in 71–84 % [13, 14].
The addition of contrast medium for magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) has the benefit of distending the joint, picking up more subtle or undisplaced labral lesions [15]. One study has shown good correlation between MRA and arthroscopy for labral lesions [16]. However, MRA is more invasive, has a higher cost and is associated with more risks [17]. One study comparing MRA with arthroscopic findings reported only fair to moderate agreement between the modalities [18]. This included the over-reporting of 4 rotator cuff and 13 GHL injuries and the under-reporting of two Bankart lesions in 18 patients [18].
Magnetic resonance angiography is becoming increasingly used to investigate shoulder instability and aid decisions on treatment. However, controversy surrounds how accurate this modality is at identifying associated injuries and whether it should be performed in all cases. The aim of this study is to establish the sensitivity and specificity of MRA in traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations.
Materials and methods
A retrospective analysis was carried out between January 2011 and January 2014 of consecutive patients undergoing MRA for the investigation of a traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in two District General Hospitals in the United Kingdom. The project was registered locally, but ethics committee approval and patient consent were not sought because of the retrospective nature of data collection. The patient must have had a radiographically proven shoulder dislocation within 6 months of the MRA. MRA without contrast medium and those not proceeding to shoulder arthroscopy were excluded from the study. The decision to obtain an MRA was made in each case by the consultant responsible for the patient’s care. Similarly, interpretation of MRA findings and the decision to proceed to arthroscopy were made by the individual consultants in conjunction with clinical symptoms. The arthrogram was performed under radiographic guidance and sterile conditions. Ten to 20 ml of gadolinium was injected via a posterior approach. The images were interpreted by 1 of 8 musculoskeletal radiologists and patients were treated by 1 of 8 consultant orthopaedic surgeons.
Demographic data were collected from electronic records. Arthroscopic findings were obtained from the surgical notes and MRA findings from radiology reports. Arthroscopic findings were used as a reference for MRA findings. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and their confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the different injuries. Analysis of findings in primary and recurrent dislocations was also performed. Complications and the success of arthroscopic treatment were not analysed.
Results
During the study period 69 patients underwent both an MRA and shoulder arthroscopy following anterior shoulder dislocations. Nine patients were lost to follow-up as clinical notes were unavailable for review, leaving 60 study participants. Fifty-three patients (88 %) were male, the mean age was 28 years (range 18 to 50) and 16 subjects (27 %) had suffered a primary dislocation. The mean time from MRA to surgery was 5 months (range 1 to 14 months).
Soft tissue Bankart lesions were present in 51 cases (85 %), osseous Bankart lesions in 10 (17 %) and Hill–Sachs lesions in 19 (32 %). Figures 1–3 give MRA examples of these pathologies. Table 1 demonstrates the presence of the various associated injuries on MRA and arthroscopy. The MRA demonstrated 16 injuries that were not subsequently identified during arthroscopy: 8 Hill–Sachs, 5 GHL and 3 rotator cuff. The MRA failed to demonstrate 8 injuries: 3 soft-tissue Bankart, 2 osseous Bankart, and 3 SLAP. The sensitivities, specificities and positive predictive values of MRA for the various injuries are illustrated in Table 2.
The incidence of associated injuries in the first-time and recurrent dislocation groups are illustrated in Table 3. Although the incidence in the recurrent dislocation group was higher for Bankart, Hill–Sachs, rotator cuff and SLAP lesions, this did not reach statistical significance. The sensitivity and specificity of first-time dislocations for all injuries were 0.92 (CI 0.72–0.99) and 0.93 (CI 0.85–0.97) respectively, whilst for recurrent dislocations they were 0.9 (CI 0.81–0.96) and 0.95 (CI 0.91–0.97).
Discussion
Magnetic resonance imaging is frequently used in the assessment of shoulder instability and a recent survey demonstrated that UK surgeons are increasingly using this investigation to aid the identification of associated injuries. The patients included in this study were typically young males, a group that typically has both the highest incidence of shoulder dislocation [2] and who are most at risk of recurrent instability [4–7]. Therefore, MRA findings in these patients are of particular interest to surgeons as surgical intervention is becoming increasingly frequent in this group [8].
Magnetic resonance angiography has been reported to improve the detection rate [15] and a review of 60 cases in this study showed a sensitivity of 0.9 in all injuries. The incidence of soft-tissue Bankart lesions was 85 %, osseous Bankart lesions 17 % and Hill–Sachs lesions 32 %. Previous reports have demonstrated that Bankart lesions are present in 73–90 % and Hill–Sachs lesions 71–84 % of shoulder dislocations [13, 15, 19, 20]. The incidence of Hill–Sachs lesions is considerably lower in the current study, in fact arthroscopic findings suggest that in this series Hill–Sachs were over-reported on MRA. This variation further supports the difficulty in identifying osseous lesions using MRI [15], although a lack of documentation in surgical notes may also have been a factor. The incidence of the majority of injuries was higher in the recurrent dislocation group. Although these differences did not reach statistical significance, the presence of these injuries may have predisposed patients to further dislocations, explaining these higher figures.
The overall sensitivity (0.9) and specificity (0.94) of MRA is high, when broken down to individual injuries this varies with the sensitivity of Bankart lesions 0.92. This sensitivity of Bankart lesions is within the range previously reported in the literature (0.65–0.95) [21–24]. The 1.0 sensitivity of MRA for Hill–Sachs lesions was similar to that presented in the literature (0.96–1.0) [22, 25]; however, the 0.8 specificity is lower than that previously reported [22, 25]. Osseous lesions are known to be more troublesome when identifying using MRA, and this is further supported by the low sensitivity in detecting osseous Bankart lesions (0.8). These findings suggest that CT scans should be considered if further clarification on osseous injuries is required.
The 0.5 sensitivity for SLAP lesions is low and suggests that MRA cannot be relied upon solely for this diagnosis. However, the available evidence on the accuracy of MRA in diagnosing SLAP lesions is conflicting with two studies reporting sensitivity and specificity as high as 0.89 and 0.91 respectively [24, 26]. On the other hand, an alternative study reports a sensitivity of 0.38 after unenhanced MRI [27]. The results from this study suggest that MRA might not be as accurate at diagnosing SLAP lesions as has been reported previously. The specificity and positive predictive values of MRA were lowest for diagnosing GHL and rotator cuff injuries. These findings are supported by a previous study of 18 patients where 13 GHL and 4 rotator cuff injuries reported on MRA were not subsequently present at arthroscopy [18]. Therefore, potentially, patients are undergoing unnecessary surgical intervention because of these false-positive results from the MRA.
In addition, failure of MRA to demonstrate associated injuries in 8 patients (13 %) is a concern: soft-tissue Bankart (5 %), SLAP (5 %) and osseous Bankart lesions (3 %). Surgeons may be basing their management decisions on inaccurate MRA findings, leading to incorrect treatment. This highlights the importance of history and clinical examination findings in these patients. Young patients who plan to return to a high level of physical activity have a high rate of recurrence [4–7]; in the absence of osseous lesions a primary diagnostic arthroscopy proceeding to surgical intervention may be an acceptable approach as a negative MRA does not exclude predisposing injuries to recurrence.
The study does have limitations. Both patients with primary and recurrent shoulder dislocations are included, the frequency and severity of associated injuries may vary between the two groups, affecting the results. A large number of radiologists and surgeons were involved in reporting their findings and a variation in interpretation and documentation may have been present. Arthroscopy has been used as the gold standard for comparison in this study, but identification with this technique is not faultless and failure of the surgeon to accurately document findings may further reduce the accuracy of arthroscopic findings. Nine patients were excluded as operation notes could not be located and this reduced the external validity of the results. The variable time from MRA to surgery (range 1–14 months) may have allowed for further injuries to have occurred in these patients who are prone to recurrent dislocation and thus under-diagnosis on MRA. This may reflect the current differing practice of surgeons regarding the threshold for obtaining MRA after dislocations.
Conclusion
Magnetic resonance angiography has a high sensitivity when used to identify associated injuries in shoulder dislocation, although in 13 % arthroscopy identified an additional injury. The overall strength of agreement between MRA and arthroscopic findings was good, but identification of GHL and rotator cuff injuries was only moderate. Although the use of MRI for the investigation of shoulder instability is increasing, caution should be exercised as inaccuracies in interpretation are not uncommon.
References
Leroux T, Wasserstein D, Veillette C, et al. Epidemiology of primary anterior shoulder dislocation requiring closed reduction in Ontario. Can Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(2):442–50.
Zacchilli MA, Owens BD. Epidemiology of shoulder dislocations presenting to emergency departments in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(3):542–9.
Smith T. Immobilisation following traumatic anterior glenohumeral joint dislocation. Injury. 2006;37(3):228–37.
Chalidis B, Sachinis N, Dimitriou C, Papadopoulos P, Samoladas E, Pournaras J. Has the management of shoulder dislocation changed over time. Int Orthop. 2007;31(3):385–9.
Hovelius L, Augustini B, Fredin H, Johansson O, Norlin R, Thorling J. Primary anterior dislocation of the shoulder in young patients. A ten year prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:1677–84.
Kralinger F, Gloser W, Wischatta R, Wambacher M, Sperner G. Predicting recurrence after primary anterior shoulder dislocation. Am J Sports Med. 2002;20:41–8.
Robinson CM, Dobson RJ. Anterior instability of the shoulder after trauma. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2004;86:469–79.
Malhotra A, Freudmann MS, Hay SM. Management of traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in the 17- to 25-year age group: a dramatic evolution of practice. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(4):545–53.
Chahal JL, Marks PH, Macdonald PB, et al. Anatomic Bankart repair compared with nonoperative treatment and/or arthroscopic lavage for first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(4):565–75.
Hill H, Sachs M. The groove defect of the humeral head. A frequently unrecognised complication of dislocations of the shoulder joint. Radiology. 1940;35:690–700.
Bankart AS. Recurrent or habitual dislocation of the shoulder-joint. Br Med J. 1923;2(3285):1132–3.
Reuss BL, Schwartzberg R, Zlatkin MB, Cooperman A, Dixon JR. Magnetic resonance imaging accuracy for the diagnosis of superior labrum anterior-posterior lesions in the community setting: eighty-three arthroscopically confirmed cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15:580–5.
Horst K, Von Harten R, Weber C, et al. Assessment of coincidence and defect sizes in Bankart and Hill-Sachs lesions after anterior shoulder dislocation: a radiological study. Br J Radiol. 2014;87:1034.
Antonio GE, Griffith JF, Yu AB, Yung PS, Chan KM, Ahuja AT. First-time shoulder dislocation: high prevalence of labral injury and age-related differences revealed by MR arthrography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26(4):983–91.
Sanders TG, Zlatkin M, Montgomery J. Imaging of glenohumeral instability. Semin Roentgenol. 2010;45(3):160–79.
Jana M, Srivastava DN, Sharma R, et al. Magnetic resonance arthrography for assessing severity of glenohumeral labroligamentous lesions. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2012;20(2):230–5.
Newberg AH, Munn CS, Robbins AH. Complications of arthrography. Radiology. 1985;155(3):605–6.
Van der Veen HC, Collins JP, Rijk PC. Value of magnetic resonance arthrography in post-traumatic anterior shoulder instability prior to arthroscopy: a prospective evaluation of MRA versus arthroscopy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012;132(3):371–5.
Rowe CR, Patel D, Southmayd WW. The Bankart procedure: a long-term end result study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60(1):1–16.
Taylor DC, Arciero RA. Pathologic changes associated with shoulder dislocations. Arthroscopic and physical examination findings in first-time, traumatic anterior dislocations. Am J Sports Med. 1997;25:306–11.
Jonas SC, Walton MJ, Sarangi PP. Is MRA an unnecessary expense in the management of a clinically unstable shoulder? A comparison of MRA and arthroscopic findings in 90 patients. Acta Orthop. 2012;83(3):267–70.
Parmar H, Jhankaria B, Maheshwari M, Singrakhia M, Shanbag S, Chawla A, et al. Magnetic resonance arthrography in recurrent anterior shoulder instability as compared to arthroscopy: a prospective comparative study. J Postgrad Med. 2002;48(4):270–3.
Palmer WE, Caslowitz PL. Anterior shoulder instability: diagnostic criteria determined from prospective analysis of 121 arthrograms. Radiology. 1995;197(3):819–25.
Palmer WE, Brown JH, Rosenthal DI. Labral-ligamentous complex of the shoulder: evaluation with MR arthrography. Radiology. 1994;190(3):645–51.
Hayes ML, Collins MS, Morgan JA, Wenger DE, Dahm DL. Efficacy of diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging for articular cartilage lesions of the glenohumeral joint in patients with instability. Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39:1199–204.
Bencardino JT, Beltran J, Rosenberg ZS, Rokito A, Schmahmann S, Mota J. Superior labrum anterior-posterior lesions: diagnosis with MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology. 2000;241(1):267–71.
Connolly KP, Schwartzberg RS, Reuss B, Crumble Jr D, Homan BM. Sensitivity and specificity of noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging reports in the diagnosis of type-II superior labral anterior-posterior lesions in the community setting. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(4):308–13.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest and that no funding was received during the production of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jordan, R.W., Naeem, R., Srinivas, K. et al. A comparison of magnetic resonance arthrography and arthroscopic findings in the assessment of anterior shoulder dislocations. Skeletal Radiol 44, 653–657 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-2080-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-2080-6