Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Rotator Cuff Pathologies: A Hospital-Based Observational Study.

Bhargavi; Dr. G. V. Parvatheswara Rao; Savithri

doi:10.51168/2zebgp28

Authors

Dr. M. Bhargavi Senior Resident, Department of Radiology, Govt Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India
Dr. G. V. Parvatheswara Rao Professor, Department of Radiology, Alluri Sitarama Raju Academy of Medical Sciences, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India
Dr. T. Savithri Professor and Head, Department of Radiology, Govt Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51168/2zebgp28

Keywords:

Rotator cuff, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, diagnostic imaging, shoulder, tendon tear

Abstract

Background:

Rotator cuff disorders are common causes of shoulder pain and disability. Ultrasonography (USG) is accessible and dynamic, whereas magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides broader soft-tissue, osseous, and intra-articular assessment.

Objectives:

To characterize rotator cuff pathology and acromion morphology and to compare USG findings with MRI in patients with suspected rotator cuff disease.

Methods:

This hospital-based cross-sectional comparative imaging study included 50 symptomatic patients evaluated at a government teaching hospital in Vijayawada from August 2023 to July 2024. All participants underwent USG followed by 1.5-T MRI. Frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were reported. Valid paired inferential p-values could not be calculated because participant-level discordant cells were unavailable in the retained dataset.

Results:

Participants were predominantly 51-60 years old (54.0%) and male (62.0%); 62.0% reported shoulder trauma and 76.0% had chronic symptoms. Type II curved acromion was most frequent (36.0%). MRI detected supraspinatus tendinopathy in 62.0%, partial-thickness tears in 22.0%, and full-thickness tears in 10.0%, compared with 50.0%, 18.0%, and 6.0% on USG. USG sensitivity ranged from 66.7% to 93.8% and NPV from 75.0% to 94.1%. No between-modality p-values are reported because valid paired contingency data were unavailable.

Conclusion:

USG detected clinically relevant rotator cuff abnormalities, while MRI identified more tendon lesions and additional associated pathology. The modalities are best interpreted as complementary within the limits of this dataset.

Recommendations:

USG can be used as an initial imaging examination when experienced operators are available; MRI is appropriate for equivocal findings, complex tears, or suspected associated intra-articular or osseous lesions.

Author Biographies

Dr. M. Bhargavi, Senior Resident, Department of Radiology, Govt Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India

is a Senior Resident in the Department of Radiology at Government Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India. Her academic and clinical interests include musculoskeletal imaging, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and the application of diagnostic imaging techniques in the evaluation of musculoskeletal disorders.
Dr. G. V. Parvatheswara Rao, Professor, Department of Radiology, Alluri Sitarama Raju Academy of Medical Sciences, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India

is a Professor in the Department of Radiology at Alluri Sitarama Raju Academy of Medical Sciences, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India. He is actively involved in clinical radiology, postgraduate teaching, academic research, and interpretation of advanced diagnostic imaging. His professional interests include ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and musculoskeletal radiology. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3146-1254
Dr. T. Savithri, Professor and Head, Department of Radiology, Govt Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India

is Professor and Head of the Department of Radiology at Government Siddhartha Medical College, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India. She is involved in undergraduate and postgraduate medical education, clinical radiology, departmental academic activities, and research. Her academic interests include diagnostic radiology, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and musculoskeletal imaging.

References

1.Yamamoto A, Takagishi K, Osawa T, Yanagawa T, Nakajima D, Shitara H, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of a rotator cuff tear in the general population. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(1):116-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.04.006

2. Tempelhof S, Rupp S, Seil R. Age-related prevalence of rotator cuff tears in asymptomatic shoulders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;8(4):296-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1058-2746(99)90148-9

3. Giri A, O'Hanlon D, Jain NB. Risk factors for rotator cuff disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2023;66(1):101631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2022.101631

4. de Jesus JO, Parker L, Frangos AJ, Nazarian LN. Accuracy of MRI, MR arthrography, and ultrasound in the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(6):1701-7. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1241

5. Roy JS, Braen C, Leblond J, Desmeules F, Dionne CE, MacDermid JC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography, MRI and MR arthrography in the characterisation of rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(20):1316-28. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-094148

6. Smith TO, Back T, Toms AP, Hing CB. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for rotator cuff tears in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Radiol. 2011;66(11):1036-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2011.05.007

7. Teefey SA, Rubin DA, Middleton WD, Hildebolt CF, Leibold RA, Yamaguchi K. Detection and quantification of rotator cuff tears. Comparison of ultrasonographic, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopic findings in seventy-one consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(4):708-16. PMID:15069134. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200404000-00007

8. Farooqi AS, Lee A, Novikov D, Kelly AM, Li X, Kelly JD 4th, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(10):23259671211035106. https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671211035106

9. Rutten MJCM, Spaargaren GJ, van Loon T, de Waal Malefijt MC, Kiemeney LALM, Jager GJ. Detection of rotator cuff tears: the value of MRI following ultrasound. Eur Radiol. 2010;20(2):450-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1561-9

10. Naqvi GA, Jadaan M, Harrington P. Accuracy of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging for detection of full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Int J Shoulder Surg. 2009;3(4):94-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-6042.63218

11. Lenza M, Buchbinder R, Takwoingi Y, Johnston RV, Hanchard NCA, Faloppa F. Magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance arthrography and ultrasonography for assessing rotator cuff tears in people with shoulder pain for whom surgery is being considered. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(9): CD009020. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009020.pub2

12. Gill TJ, McIrvin E, Kocher MS, Homa K, Mair SD, Hawkins RJ. The relative importance of acromial morphology and age with respect to rotator cuff pathology. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(4):327-30. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2002.124425

13. Moor BK, Wieser K, Slankamenac K, Gerber C, Bouaicha S. Relationship of individual scapular anatomy and degenerative rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(4):536-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.11.008

14. Teefey SA, Hasan SA, Middleton WD, Patel M, Wright RW, Yamaguchi K. Ultrasonography of the rotator cuff. A comparison of ultrasonographic and arthroscopic findings in one hundred consecutive cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(4):498-504. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200004000-00005