Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in assessing medial collateral ligament and medial meniscus injuries? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.6 Q2 Medicine
Melanie Potter, Anthony Smith
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in assessing medial collateral ligament and medial meniscus injuries? A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Melanie Potter, Anthony Smith","doi":"10.5826/tuj.2026.18171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medial Collateral Ligament (MCL) and Medial Meniscus (MM) injuries are common medial knee pathologies. While MRI and arthroscopy are gold-standard diagnostic modalities, they are costly, invasive, and often delayed. Ultrasound is fast, inexpensive, and non-invasive, with growing use clinically, particularly point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims were to evaluate ultrasound's diagnostic performance for MCL and MM injuries, both as standalone modalities and initial screening tools.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar identified studies between 1st October 2014 and 31st October 2024. Fourteen studies (1,259 patients) met inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using validated tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall risk of bias was low, with moderate certainty of evidence for MCL and low certainty for MM injuries. Nine studies (713 patients) evaluated MCL injuries. Bivariate meta-analysis showed pooled sensitivity 0.83 (95% CI: 0.76-0.88), specificity 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-0.98), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 117.8, and area under the SROC curve (AUC) 0.90. Heterogeneity was minimal (I² = 0%). Twelve studies (969 patients) evaluated MM injuries, with pooled sensitivity 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88), specificity 0.89 (95% CI: 0.81-0.94), DOR 45, and AUC 0.88. Heterogeneity was low for sensitivity but substantial for specificity (I² = 70.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultrasound demonstrated high specificity for MCL and moderate sensitivity for MM injuries. It may serve as a valuable modality for MCL injuries in POCUS settings and as an initial screening tool for MM injuries. As POCUS utilisation expands, it may support diagnostic pathways.</p>","PeriodicalId":36911,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound Journal","volume":"18 1","pages":"18171"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13552456/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5826/tuj.2026.18171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medial Collateral Ligament (MCL) and Medial Meniscus (MM) injuries are common medial knee pathologies. While MRI and arthroscopy are gold-standard diagnostic modalities, they are costly, invasive, and often delayed. Ultrasound is fast, inexpensive, and non-invasive, with growing use clinically, particularly point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims were to evaluate ultrasound's diagnostic performance for MCL and MM injuries, both as standalone modalities and initial screening tools.

Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar identified studies between 1st October 2014 and 31st October 2024. Fourteen studies (1,259 patients) met inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using validated tools.

Results: Overall risk of bias was low, with moderate certainty of evidence for MCL and low certainty for MM injuries. Nine studies (713 patients) evaluated MCL injuries. Bivariate meta-analysis showed pooled sensitivity 0.83 (95% CI: 0.76-0.88), specificity 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-0.98), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 117.8, and area under the SROC curve (AUC) 0.90. Heterogeneity was minimal (I² = 0%). Twelve studies (969 patients) evaluated MM injuries, with pooled sensitivity 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88), specificity 0.89 (95% CI: 0.81-0.94), DOR 45, and AUC 0.88. Heterogeneity was low for sensitivity but substantial for specificity (I² = 70.6%).

Conclusions: Ultrasound demonstrated high specificity for MCL and moderate sensitivity for MM injuries. It may serve as a valuable modality for MCL injuries in POCUS settings and as an initial screening tool for MM injuries. As POCUS utilisation expands, it may support diagnostic pathways.

超声诊断内侧副韧带和内侧半月板损伤的准确性?系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:内侧副韧带(MCL)和内侧半月板(MM)损伤是膝关节内侧常见的病变。虽然核磁共振成像和关节镜检查是金标准的诊断方式,但它们价格昂贵,具有侵入性,而且往往延迟。超声快速、廉价、无创,临床应用越来越广泛,特别是即时超声(POCUS)。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估超声作为独立模式和初始筛查工具对MCL和MM损伤的诊断性能。方法:系统检索PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL和谷歌Scholar,确定2014年10月1日至2024年10月31日之间的研究。14项研究(1259例患者)符合纳入标准。使用经过验证的工具评估方法学质量。结果:总体偏倚风险较低,MCL的证据确定性中等,MM损伤的证据确定性较低。9项研究(713例患者)评估了MCL损伤。双因素荟萃分析显示,合并敏感性0.83 (95% CI: 0.76-0.88),特异性0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-0.98),诊断优势比(DOR) 117.8, SROC曲线下面积(AUC) 0.90。异质性最小(I²= 0%)。12项研究(969例患者)评估MM损伤,合并敏感性0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88),特异性0.89 (95% CI: 0.81-0.94), DOR 45, AUC 0.88。异质性在敏感性上较低,但在特异性上较大(I²= 70.6%)。结论:超声对MCL具有高特异性,对MM损伤具有中等敏感性。它可以作为POCUS中MCL损伤的一种有价值的模式,也可以作为MM损伤的初步筛查工具。随着POCUS应用的扩大,它可能支持诊断途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ultrasound Journal
Ultrasound Journal Health Professions-Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
45
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书