×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Review paper

Early career accuracy of shoulder ultrasound in evaluating rotator cuff tendon tears

By
Naser Obeida Orcid logo ,
Naser Obeida
Contact Naser Obeida

Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Asma’a Al-Mnayyis ,
Asma’a Al-Mnayyis

College of Medicine, Yarmouk University

Suhaib Bani Essa ,
Suhaib Bani Essa

Department of Special Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Mohammad Alkhatatba ,
Mohammad Alkhatatba

Department of Special Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Heba Al Qudah ,
Heba Al Qudah

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Majed M. Aljarrah ,
Majed M. Aljarrah

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Yahya Alshgerat ,
Yahya Alshgerat

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Ammar Al-Tawarh ,
Ammar Al-Tawarh

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Raghad Al-titi ,
Raghad Al-titi

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Taqwa Alzuqaili ,
Taqwa Alzuqaili

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Waseem Samir
Waseem Samir

Jordan University of Science and Technology , Irbid , Jordan

Abstract

Aim
To compare the accuracy of shoulder ultrasound (US) in diagnosing rotator cuff tendon tears between junior and experienced musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologists. Also, to compare the overall ultrasound accuracy referenced to MRI.
Methods
A retrospective data collection for patients with clinically suspected rotator cuff tears who underwent ultrasound from
June 2021 - June 2023 was conducted. Patients who also performed MRI for the same shoulder were only included in the study. US and MRI images were evaluated by two MSK radiologists with different experience levels. The diagnosis of rotator cuff tears was done on MRI through consensus. Ultrasound accuracy referenced to MRI was calculated for each radiologist. A second consensus was conducted for US images to calculate the overall US accuracy.
The percentage of agreement and Cohen’s kappa correlation coefficient were calculated before and after the US consensus.
Results
Forty-one patients were included in the study, 12 (29.3%) males and 29 (70.7%) females, with a mean age of 49.6 years. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), and accuracy of US interpreted by junior vs experienced MSK radiologists for supraspinatus full thickness tears (FTTs) were 100% vs 91%, 90% vs 93%, 79% vs 83%, 100% vs 97%, and 93% vs 93%, respectively. After the second consensus, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV, and accuracy were 91%, 90%, 77%, 96%, and 90%, respectively.
Conclusion
The accuracy of shoulder ultrasound in diagnosing supraspinatus FTTs by junior MSK radiologists compares well to the
more experienced ones, but not for partial thickness tears (PTTs).

References

1.
Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, Brammah T, Busby H, Roxby M, et al. Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: the comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites, and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998;57:649–55.
2.
Ostör AJ, Richards CA, Prevost AT, Speed CA, Hazleman BL. Diagnosis and relation to general health of shoulder disorders presenting to primary care. Rheumatology (Oxford. 2005;44:800–5.
3.
Naredo E, Aguado P, Miguel E, Uson J, Mayordomo L, Gijon-Baños J, et al. Painful shoulder: Comparison of physical examination and ultrasonographic findings. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61:132–6.
4.
Murrell GA, Walton. Diagnosis of rotator cuff tears. Lancet. 2001;357:769–70.
5.
Barad HV, Patel V, Patel S, Patel M. To determine the role of ultrasonography as a primary imaging modality as compared to MRI in patients with shoulder pain. J Famil Med Prim Care. 2022;11:2119–22.
6.
Kruse KK, Dilisio MF, Wang WL, Schmidt CC. Do we really need to order magnetic resonance imaging? Shoulder surgeon ultrasound practice patterns and beliefs. JSES. 2019;3:93–8.
7.
Vlychou M, Dailiana Z, Fotiadou A, Papanagiotou M, Fezoulidis M, K. Symptomatic partial rotator cuff tears: diagnostic performance of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging with surgical correlation. Acta Radiol. 2009;50:101–5.
8.
Rutten MJ, Maresch BJ, Jager GJ, Blickman JG, Holsbeeck MT. Ultrasound of the rotator cuff with MRI and anatomic correlation. Eur J Radiol. 2007;62:427–36.
9.
El-Kouba G, Andreas Huber T, Freitas S, V A, H S, A.M. Comparison of complementary exams in the diagnosis of rotator cuff injuries. Rev Bras Ortop. 2015;45:418–25.
10.
Chauhan NS, Ahluwalia A, Sharma YP, Thakur L. A prospective comparative study of high resolution ultrasound and MRI in the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears in a Tertiary Hospital of North India. Pol J Radiol. 2016;81:491–7.
11.
Singh A, Thukral CL, Gupta K, Singh MI, Lata S, Arora RK. Role and correlation of high resolution ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of patients with shoulder pain. Pol J Radiol. 2017;82:410–7.
12.
Apostolopoulos AP, Angelis S, Yallapragada RK, Khan S, Nadjafi J, Balfousias T, et al. The sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in detecting rotator cuff tears. Cureus. 2019;11:e4581.
13.
Cappiello A, Stano V, Bisaccia M, Meccariello L, Falzarano G, Medici A, et al. Is baseline strain index a prognostic factor for small unilateral supraspinatus tendon tears? A prospective study. IJSM. 2016;2:150–5.
14.
Mayer V. Ultrasonography of the rotator cuff. J Ultrasound Med. 1985;4(608):607.
15.
Middleton WD, Edelstein G, Reinus WR, Melson GL, Totty WG, Murphy WA. Sonographic detection of rotator cuff tears. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985;144(349).
16.
Churchill RS, Fehringer EV, Dubinsky TJ, Matsen FA. Rotator cuff ultrasonography: diagnostic capabilities. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004;12(6).
17.
Roy JS, Braën 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;49:1316–28.
18.
Zhang X, Gu X, Zhao L. Comparative analysis of real-time dynamic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of rotator cuff tear injury.
19.
Chang CY, Wang SF, Chiou HJ, Ma HL, Sun YC, Wu HD. Comparison of shoulder ultrasound and MR imaging in diagnosing full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Clin Imaging. 2002;26:50–4.
20.
Moosmayer S, Heir S, Smith HJ. Sonography of the rotator cuff in painful shoulders performed without knowledge of clinical information: results from 58 sonographic examinations with surgical correlation. J Clin Ultrasound. 2007;35:20–6.
21.
Murphy RJ, Daines MT, Carr AJ, Rees JL. An independent learning method for orthopaedic surgeons performing shoulder ultrasound to identify fullthickness tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:266–72.
22.
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(94).
23.
Sipola P, Niemitukia L, Kröger H, Höfling I, Väätäinen U. Detection and quantification of rotator cuff tears with ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging—a prospective study in 77 consecutive patients with a surgical reference. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2010;36:1981–9.
24.
Cullen DM, Breidahl WH, Janes GC. Diagnostic accuracy of shoulder ultrasound performed by a single operator. Australas Radiol. 2007;51:226–9.
25.
Vlychou M, Dailiana Z, Fotiadou A, Papanagiotou M, Fezoulidis M, K. Symptomatic partial rotator cuff tears: diagnostic performance of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging with surgical correlation. Acta Radiol. 2009;50:101–5.
26.
Candia A, S D, F P, E P, M B. Real time compound ultrasound of the shoulder. Radiol Oncol. 2002;36:319–25.
27.
McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb. 2012;22:276–82.

Citation

Authors retain copyright. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License

 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.