Validation of Ultrasound for Quantification of Knee Meniscal Tissue: A Cadaveric Study

<b><b>Background</b>:</b> While MRI is the gold standard for meniscal assessment, its cost and accessibility limitations have led to growing interest in ultrasound, though its validity for quantifying meniscal tissue remains unclear. To validate the use of ultrasound in quantifying meniscal tissue across the anterior, middle, and posterior regions of both menisci (medial and lateral) in longitudinal and transverse planes by comparison with cadaveric dissection. <b>Methods</b>: A cross-sectional study was conducted on ten cryopreserved anatomical donors, obtaining a total of 120 ultrasound scans from the different meniscal regions. Following ultrasound imaging, cadaveric dissection was performed to facilitate photometric measurements, thereby enabling validation of the ultrasound findings. The intra-examiner reliability of the ultrasound measurements was also assessed. <b>Results</b>: The intra-examiner reliability of ultrasound measurements ranged from moderate to excellent. A strong and statistically significant positive correlation was observed between ultrasound and photometric measurements across all meniscal regions (r > 0.821; <i>p</i> < 0.05). In the medial meniscus, ultrasound visualized 99.1% of the anterior region (8.71 mm with ultrasound; 8.64 mm with photometry), 96.3% of the middle region (9.09 mm with ultrasound; 9.39 mm with photometry), and 98.5% of the posterior region (10.54 mm with ultrasound; 10.61 mm with photometry). In the lateral meniscus, ultrasound visualized 107.1% of the anterior region, 105.1% of the middle region, and 97.8% of the posterior region. The observed excess in tissue visualization in some regions likely reflects the inclusion of adjacent connective tissue, indistinguishable from meniscal tissue on ultrasound. <b>Conclusions</b>: Ultrasound is a valid and reliable modality for visualizing most meniscal tissue across regions, with a measurement discrepancy under 0.7 mm compared to anatomical dissection. However, caution is advised as adjacent connective tissue may sometimes be misidentified as meniscal tissue during evaluations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diagnostics
Published
2025-02-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15030389
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.01
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Validation of Ultrasound for Quantification of Knee Meniscal Tissue: A Cadaveric Study

Carlos López-de–Celis, Miguel Malo-Urriés, Isabel Albarova‐Corral, Jacobo Rodríguez‐Sanz et al.
1 citations
Diagnostics
Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
2.01
article

Validation of Ultrasound for Quantification of Knee Meniscal Tissue: A Cadaveric Study

Carlos López-de–Celis, Miguel Malo-Urriés, Isabel Albarova‐Corral, Jacobo Rodríguez‐Sanz, Sergio Borrella-Andrés
article en
1 citations

Abstract

<b><b>Background</b>:</b> While MRI is the gold standard for meniscal assessment, its cost and accessibility limitations have led to growing interest in ultrasound, though its validity for quantifying meniscal tissue remains unclear. To validate the use of ultrasound in quantifying meniscal tissue across the anterior, middle, and posterior regions of both menisci (medial and lateral) in longitudinal and transverse planes by comparison with cadaveric dissection. <b>Methods</b>: A cross-sectional study was conducted on ten cryopreserved anatomical donors, obtaining a total of 120 ultrasound scans from the different meniscal regions. Following ultrasound imaging, cadaveric dissection was performed to facilitate photometric measurements, thereby enabling validation of the ultrasound findings. The intra-examiner reliability of the ultrasound measurements was also assessed. <b>Results</b>: The intra-examiner reliability of ultrasound measurements ranged from moderate to excellent. A strong and statistically significant positive correlation was observed between ultrasound and photometric measurements across all meniscal regions (r > 0.821; <i>p</i> < 0.05). In the medial meniscus, ultrasound visualized 99.1% of the anterior region (8.71 mm with ultrasound; 8.64 mm with photometry), 96.3% of the middle region (9.09 mm with ultrasound; 9.39 mm with photometry), and 98.5% of the posterior region (10.54 mm with ultrasound; 10.61 mm with photometry). In the lateral meniscus, ultrasound visualized 107.1% of the anterior region, 105.1% of the middle region, and 97.8% of the posterior region. The observed excess in tissue visualization in some regions likely reflects the inclusion of adjacent connective tissue, indistinguishable from meniscal tissue on ultrasound. <b>Conclusions</b>: Ultrasound is a valid and reliable modality for visualizing most meniscal tissue across regions, with a measurement discrepancy under 0.7 mm compared to anatomical dissection. However, caution is advised as adjacent connective tissue may sometimes be misidentified as meniscal tissue during evaluations.

DiagnosticsVol. 15(3)
Universidad de Zaragoza (ES), Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (ES), Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol (ES), Barcelona Activa (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
2.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.