Philipp Zehnder, Max Kersten, Markus Schwarz, Peter Biberthaler, Chlodwig Kirchhoff, Lukas Willinger
{"title":"Comparison of conventional MRI and CT scans for assessing bony parameters and classifying On- and Off-Track lesions in anterior shoulder dislocations","authors":"Philipp Zehnder, Max Kersten, Markus Schwarz, Peter Biberthaler, Chlodwig Kirchhoff, Lukas Willinger","doi":"10.1007/s00402-025-06062-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Shoulder dislocation is the most common major joint dislocation, with anterior dislocations accounting for 95% of cases. Accurate assessment of bony lesions, such as glenoid bone loss (GBL) and Hill-Sachs lesions, is critical for treatment planning. While computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for evaluating bony parameters, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may serve as a viable alternative, offering no radiation exposure. This study aims to compare the reliability of conventional 2D (two- Dimensional)-MRI with 2D-CT in measuring bony parameters and classifying lesions as on- or off-track. It was hypothesized that there is no difference in evaluation between MRI and conventional CT scans.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective case-control study was conducted on 61 patients (mean age 45 ± 19 years) with anterior shoulder dislocations who underwent both CT and MRI imaging. Radiographic measurements, including glenoid diameter, glenoid defect (in width), Hill-Sachs lesion and bony bridge, were obtained independently from CT and MRI scans. Patients were categorized as on- or off-track based on the glenoid track and Hill-Sachs index. Statistical analyses included correlation tests, Bland-Altman plots, interrater agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient), and sensitivity and specificity analyses for lesion classification.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>MRI showed good agreement with CT across most parameters, with mean differences of less than 1 mm for glenoid defect, glenoid diameter, and Hill-Sachs lesions. Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.62 (bony bridge) to 0.93 (glenoid defect). Bland-Altman plots revealed good agreement for glenoid parameters but higher variance for the Hill-Sachs lesion and bony bridge. MRI correctly classified 89% of on-track lesions (sensitivity) and 76% of off-track lesions (specificity). Interrater agreement was excellent for glenoid defect measurements (ICC = 0.962) and lower for the bony bridge (ICC = 0.848).</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Conventional MRI demonstrates high reliability in measuring bony parameters and good accuracy in classifying on- and off-track lesions compared to CT. MRI is a viable alternative for preoperative evaluation, particularly in cases with minor bony defects. However, in indeterminate defects, a CT scan is recommended to ensure accurate measurements, classification and treatment planning.</p><h3>Level of evidence</h3><p>Level III.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":"145 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00402-025-06062-w.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00402-025-06062-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Shoulder dislocation is the most common major joint dislocation, with anterior dislocations accounting for 95% of cases. Accurate assessment of bony lesions, such as glenoid bone loss (GBL) and Hill-Sachs lesions, is critical for treatment planning. While computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for evaluating bony parameters, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may serve as a viable alternative, offering no radiation exposure. This study aims to compare the reliability of conventional 2D (two- Dimensional)-MRI with 2D-CT in measuring bony parameters and classifying lesions as on- or off-track. It was hypothesized that there is no difference in evaluation between MRI and conventional CT scans.
Methods
A retrospective case-control study was conducted on 61 patients (mean age 45 ± 19 years) with anterior shoulder dislocations who underwent both CT and MRI imaging. Radiographic measurements, including glenoid diameter, glenoid defect (in width), Hill-Sachs lesion and bony bridge, were obtained independently from CT and MRI scans. Patients were categorized as on- or off-track based on the glenoid track and Hill-Sachs index. Statistical analyses included correlation tests, Bland-Altman plots, interrater agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient), and sensitivity and specificity analyses for lesion classification.
Results
MRI showed good agreement with CT across most parameters, with mean differences of less than 1 mm for glenoid defect, glenoid diameter, and Hill-Sachs lesions. Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.62 (bony bridge) to 0.93 (glenoid defect). Bland-Altman plots revealed good agreement for glenoid parameters but higher variance for the Hill-Sachs lesion and bony bridge. MRI correctly classified 89% of on-track lesions (sensitivity) and 76% of off-track lesions (specificity). Interrater agreement was excellent for glenoid defect measurements (ICC = 0.962) and lower for the bony bridge (ICC = 0.848).
Conclusion
Conventional MRI demonstrates high reliability in measuring bony parameters and good accuracy in classifying on- and off-track lesions compared to CT. MRI is a viable alternative for preoperative evaluation, particularly in cases with minor bony defects. However, in indeterminate defects, a CT scan is recommended to ensure accurate measurements, classification and treatment planning.
期刊介绍:
"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance.
"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).