Olivia Foesleitner, Marietta Kirchner, Fabian Preisner, Moritz Kronlage, Tim Godel, Johann M E Jende, Tim Hilgenfeld, Sabine Heiland, Wolfgang Wick, Martin Bendszus, Daniel Schwarz
{"title":"High-Resolution US vs MR Neurography for Diagnosis of Upper Extremity Peripheral Nerve Disorders.","authors":"Olivia Foesleitner, Marietta Kirchner, Fabian Preisner, Moritz Kronlage, Tim Godel, Johann M E Jende, Tim Hilgenfeld, Sabine Heiland, Wolfgang Wick, Martin Bendszus, Daniel Schwarz","doi":"10.1148/radiol.232063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>\"Just Accepted\" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in <i>Radiology</i>. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content.</i> Background High-resolution imaging methods contribute important pathomorphological information in diagnosing peripheral nerve disorders, but their diagnostic roles remain unclear due to limited clinical evidence. Purpose To investigate the diagnostic performance of high-resolution nerve US (HRUS) and MR neurography (MRN). Materials and Methods This prospective observational, single-center cohort study included 800 patients referred for clinically suspected peripheral neuropathy of the upper extremity from November 2015 to February 2022. All patients underwent both HRUS and MRN, performed and interpreted independently by experienced neuroradiologists. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of HRUS and MRN in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy correctly were calculated in reference to the final diagnosis, based on compound results of clinical, electrophysiological, imaging, and surgical/histopathological findings and compared by means of the McNemar's test and X<sup>2</sup>-Testing. Results In total 800 patients (431 male, 369 female; mean age 47.8 ± 16.5 years) were included. Overall, MRN provided higher accuracy (85.4% [95%CI: 82.7%, 87.8%] vs. 70.6% [95%CI: 67.3%, 73.8%], <i>P</i><.001) and sensitivity (91.6% [95%CI: 89.1%,93.7%] vs. 68.7% [95%CI: 64.8%,72.3%], <i>P</i><.001), while HRUS achieved higher specificity (76.0% [95%CI: 69.4%,81.9%] vs. 66.2% [95%CI: 59.1%,72.8%], <i>P</i><.001) for diagnosing peripheral neuropathy correctly. Conclusion For diagnosing peripheral neuropathies of the upper extremity, MRN achieved higher accuracy and sensitivity while HRUS achieved higher specificity. See also the editorial by Deshmukh in this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":20896,"journal":{"name":"Radiology","volume":"314 3","pages":"e232063"},"PeriodicalIF":12.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.232063","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
"Just Accepted" papers have undergone full peer review and have been accepted for publication in Radiology. This article will undergo copyediting, layout, and proof review before it is published in its final version. Please note that during production of the final copyedited article, errors may be discovered which could affect the content. Background High-resolution imaging methods contribute important pathomorphological information in diagnosing peripheral nerve disorders, but their diagnostic roles remain unclear due to limited clinical evidence. Purpose To investigate the diagnostic performance of high-resolution nerve US (HRUS) and MR neurography (MRN). Materials and Methods This prospective observational, single-center cohort study included 800 patients referred for clinically suspected peripheral neuropathy of the upper extremity from November 2015 to February 2022. All patients underwent both HRUS and MRN, performed and interpreted independently by experienced neuroradiologists. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of HRUS and MRN in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy correctly were calculated in reference to the final diagnosis, based on compound results of clinical, electrophysiological, imaging, and surgical/histopathological findings and compared by means of the McNemar's test and X2-Testing. Results In total 800 patients (431 male, 369 female; mean age 47.8 ± 16.5 years) were included. Overall, MRN provided higher accuracy (85.4% [95%CI: 82.7%, 87.8%] vs. 70.6% [95%CI: 67.3%, 73.8%], P<.001) and sensitivity (91.6% [95%CI: 89.1%,93.7%] vs. 68.7% [95%CI: 64.8%,72.3%], P<.001), while HRUS achieved higher specificity (76.0% [95%CI: 69.4%,81.9%] vs. 66.2% [95%CI: 59.1%,72.8%], P<.001) for diagnosing peripheral neuropathy correctly. Conclusion For diagnosing peripheral neuropathies of the upper extremity, MRN achieved higher accuracy and sensitivity while HRUS achieved higher specificity. See also the editorial by Deshmukh in this issue.
期刊介绍:
Published regularly since 1923 by the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), Radiology has long been recognized as the authoritative reference for the most current, clinically relevant and highest quality research in the field of radiology. Each month the journal publishes approximately 240 pages of peer-reviewed original research, authoritative reviews, well-balanced commentary on significant articles, and expert opinion on new techniques and technologies.
Radiology publishes cutting edge and impactful imaging research articles in radiology and medical imaging in order to help improve human health.