Niu EL, Milewski MD, Finlayson CJ, Stinson ZS, Joughin E, Nepple JJ, Schmale GA, Beck JJ. Reliability of MRI Interpretation of Discoid Lateral Meniscus: A Multicenter Study.
Orthop J Sports Med 2023;
11:23259671231174475. [PMID:
37275780 PMCID:
PMC10236248 DOI:
10.1177/23259671231174475]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2023] [Accepted: 02/26/2023] [Indexed: 06/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background
Discoid lateral meniscus (DLM) has a varied and complex morphology that can be challenging to assess and treat. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is frequently used for diagnosis and surgical planning; however, it is not known whether surgeons are reliable and accurate in their interpretation of MRI findings when defining the pathomorphology of DLM.
Hypothesis
Surgeons experienced in treating DLM are able to reliably interpret DLM pathology using MRI.
Study Design
Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.
Methods
Knee MRI scans from 44 patients (45 knees) were selected from a pool of surgically treated patients with DLM. Five reviewers (fellowship-trained pediatric sports medicine surgeons) performed independent review of each MRI scan using the PRiSM Discoid Meniscus Classification. Inter- and intraobserver reliability of the rating factors-primary (width, height, presence of peripheral instability or tear) and secondary (location of instability or tear, tear type)-was assessed using the Fleiss κ coefficient, designed for multiple readers with nominal variables (fair reliability, 0.21-0.40; moderate, 0.41-0.60; substantial, 0.61-0.80; excellent, 0.81-1.00). Reliability is reported as κ (95% CI).
Results
Interobserver reliability in assessing most primary and secondary characteristics ranged from substantial (meniscal width) to moderate (peripheral instability, anterior instability, posterior instability, and posterior tear). Intraobserver reliability for most characteristics ranged from substantial (peripheral instability, presence of tear, anterior instability, posterior instability, and posterior tear) to moderate (meniscal width, anterior tear, and tear type). Notable exceptions were presence of tear, anterior tear, and tear type-all with fair interobserver reliability. Height had poor interobserver reliability and fair intraobserver reliability.
Conclusion
Orthopaedic surgeons reliably interpret MRI scans using the PRiSM Discoid Meniscus Classification for the majority of DLM characteristics but vary in their assessment of height and presence and type of tear. MRI evaluation may be helpful to diagnose discoid by width and identify the presence of instability: 2 major factors in the decision to proceed with surgery. Arthroscopic evaluation should be used in conjunction with MRI findings for complete DLM diagnosis.
Collapse