ASSESSING DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF MRI IN ROTATOR CUFF TEAR DETECTION

Main Article Content

Dr Sanjay Kumar Tekam MD
Dr Upendra Solanki MD
Dr Ankit Mukati MD
Dr Niteen Tripathi MD

Keywords

Rotator cuff tears; Magnetic resonance imaging; Diagnostic performance; Partial-thickness tears; Full-thickness tears; Dataset imbalance

Abstract

Rotator cuff tears are a leading cause of shoulder pain and disability, significantly affecting quality of life and functional outcomes. Accurate diagnosis is essential to guide treatment and prevent progression from partial- to full-thickness tears. Magnetic resonance imaging is widely recognized as the preferred modality for tendon evaluation due to its ability to provide detailed soft tissue visualization. Despite its strengths, diagnostic variability persists, particularly in detecting partial-thickness tears, which often present with subtle features. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting normal tendons, partial-thickness tears, and full-thickness tears, while also assessing the impact of dataset imbalance. A secondary analysis was performed using a publicly available dataset of 2,447 cases, with 242 cases forming the test set (160 normal, 16 partial-thickness, 66 full-thickness). Classification performance was measured using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and overall accuracy. Results showed that overall accuracy was 88%. Normal tendons were detected with sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 94%, and precision of 97%, while full-thickness tears achieved sensitivity of 89%, specificity of 94%, and precision of 86%. In contrast, partial-thickness tears showed weaker results, with sensitivity of 50% and precision of 38%, largely due to their low prevalence of 6.6% in the dataset. In conclusion, magnetic resonance imaging remains a robust diagnostic tool for normal tendons and full-thickness tears. However, improving recognition of partial-thickness tears and addressing dataset imbalance are critical for reducing misclassification and optimizing clinical management.


 

Abstract 0 | Pdf Downloads 0

References

[1] Bedi A, Bishop J, Keener J, Lansdown DA, Levy O, MacDonald P, Maffulli N, Oh JH, Sabesan VJ, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Williams III RJ. Rotator cuff tears. Nature reviews Disease primers. 2024 Feb 8;10(1):8.
[2] Kim M, Park HM, Kim JY, Kim SH, Hoeke S, De Neve W. MRI-based diagnosis of rotator cuff tears using deep learning and weighted linear combinations. InMachine learning for healthcare conference 2020 Sep 18 (pp. 292-308). PMLR.
[3] Ashir A, Lombardi A, Jerban S, Ma Y, Du J, Chang EY. Magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder. Polish journal of radiology. 2020 Aug 17;85(1):420-39.
[4] Liu JN, Garcia GH, Gowd AK, Cabarcas BC, Charles MD, Romeo AA, Verma NN. Treatment of partial thickness rotator cuff tears in overhead athletes. Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine. 2018 Mar;11(1):55-62.
[5] Cook JL, Rio E, Purdam CR, Docking SI. Revisiting the continuum model of tendon pathology: what is its merit in clinical practice and research?. British journal of sports medicine. 2016 Oct 1;50(19):1187-91.
[6] Islam SM, Nasim MA, Hossain I, Ullah DM, Gupta DK, Bhuiyan MM. Introduction of medical imaging modalities. InData driven approaches on medical imaging 2023 Oct 17 (pp. 1-25). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
[7] Johnson JM, Khoshgoftaar TM. Survey on deep learning with class imbalance. Journal of big data. 2019 Dec;6(1):1-54.
[8] Fleiter TR, Mervis S. The role of 3D-CTA in the assessment of peripheral vascular lesions in trauma patients. European journal of radiology. 2007 Oct 1;64(1):92-102.
[9] 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. American journal of roentgenology. 2009 Jun;192(6):1701-7.
[10] Matthewson G, Beach CJ, Nelson AA, Woodmass JM, Ono Y, Boorman RS, Lo IK, Thornton GM. Partial thickness rotator cuff tears: current concepts. Advances in orthopedics. 2015;2015(1):458786.
[11] Lädermann A, Burkhart SS, Hoffmeyer P, Neyton L, Collin P, Yates E, Denard PJ. Classification of full-thickness rotator cuff lesions: a review. EFORT open reviews. 2016 Dec 1;1(12):420-30.
[12] Trevethan R. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Frontiers in public health. 2017 Nov 20;5:307.
[13] Kohli M, Prevedello LM, Filice RW, Geis JR. Implementing machine learning in radiology practice and research. American journal of roentgenology. 2017 Apr;208(4):754-60.
[14] Junsomboon N, Phienthrakul T. Combining over-sampling and under-sampling techniques for imbalance dataset. InProceedings of the 9th international conference on machine learning and computing 2017 Feb 24 (pp. 243-247).
[15] Hawatmeh A, Thawabi M, Aggarwal R, Abirami C, Vavilin I, Wasty N, Visveswaran G, Cohen M. Implications of misclassification of type 2 myocardial infarction on clinical outcomes. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine. 2020 Feb 1;21(2):176-9.