Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow

대한견·주관절의학회 (Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

견관절 병변의 진단에서 다중 검출 전산화 단층촬영을 이용한 관절조영술의 유용성 - 동일 환자에서 시행한 자기공명 관절조영술 및 관절경 소견과의 비교 -

The Usefulness of Multidetector CT Arthrography in the Diagnosis of Shoulder Pathology -Comparison with MR Arthrography and Arthroscopic Findings in the Same Patient-

  • 김동수 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 박경진 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 김용민 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 최의성 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 손현철 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 조병기 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 박지강 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 김석원 (충북대학교 의과대학 정형외과학교실)
  • Kim, Dong-Soo (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Park, Kyoung-Jin (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Kim, Yong-Min (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Choi, Eui-Sung (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Shon, Hyun-Chul (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Cho, Byung-Ki (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Park, Ji-Kang (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University) ;
  • Kim, Seok-Won (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chungbuk National University)
  • 발행 : 2009.12.15
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적: 본 연구의 목적은 동일한 환자에게서 시행한 전산화단층촬영 관절조영술 (CT arthrography, CTA)와 자기공명 관절조영술 (MR arthrography, MRA) 및 관절경 소견을 비교하여 견관절의 다양한 병변을 진단함에 있어 CTA의 유용성을 알아보고자 함이다. 대상 및 방법: 견관절의 질환이 의심되는 49명의 환자에게 MRA와 CTA를 동시에 시행하고, 각각의 영상을 통하여 극상근 전층 파열, 상부 관절와순 전후방 병변 (SLAP 병변), 극상근 관절측 부분층 파열 (PASTA 병변), 극상근 점액낭편 부분층 파열의 총 4개의 병변을 진단하고 MRA와 비교하여 CTA의 민감도 (sensitivity), 특이도 (specificity), 양성예측도 (positive predictive value), 음성예측도 (negative predictive value)를 평가하였다. 또한, 49명의 환자 중 수술을 시행한 34명의 관절경 수술 소견을 분석하여 CTA의 정확도를 평가하였다. 결과: CTA는 MRA와 비교할 때 극상근 전층 파열 및 SLAP 병변에서 민감도가 각각 90%, 100%, 특이도는 100%, 97.5%로 거의 대등한 진단적 유용성이 있었으며, PASTA 병변에서는 민감도 71.4%, 특이도 97.7%로 일부에서 유용성을 보였으나, 극상근 점액낭편 부분파열의 진단에는 민감도가 10%로 취약하였다. 또한 CTA에서 진단된 병변은 수술 소견과 비교할 때 극상근 전층 파열 100%, SLAP 병변 87.5%, PASTA 병변 71.4%로 높은 정확도를 보였다. 결론: CTA는 MRA와 비교할 때, 4개의 견관절 병변 중, 점액낭편 부분 파열을 제외하고 극상근 전층 파열, SLAP 병변, PASTA 병변을 평가함에 있어서 MRA와 거의 대등한 유용성을 보였다. 따라서, 보다 경제적인 검사로서 견관절 병변 진단 및 수술 후 추시 등에 유용하게 사용될 수 있을 것으로 생각된다.

Purpose: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the usefulness of CT arthrography (CTA) by conducting a comparative study of CTA and MR arthrography (MRA) with the arthroscopic findings in the same patients. Materials and methods: Forty nine patients who suffered from shoulder disease underwent MRA and CTA concurrently. The sensitivity and specificity of CTA was evaluated, as compared to MRA, in the case of four types of shoulder pathological lesions. The accuracy of CTA was evaluated by analyzing the arthroscopic findings of thirty four patients. Results: Compared to MRA, CTA showed a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 100% for diagnosing supraspinatus tendon (SST) full thickness tear, and CTA showed a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 97.5% for making the diagnosis of superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) lesion. For diagnosing partial articular side supraspinatus avulsion (PASTA) lesion, some studies have shown the usefulness of CTA with a sensitivity of 71.4% and a specificity of 97.7%. However, for diagnosing SST bursal side partial tear, the sensitivity of CTA was as low as 10%. CTA has been shown to be relatively accurate when the diagnoses were verified with the arthroscopic findings; diagnosing SST full thickness tear and SLAP lesion with CTA has shown an accuracy of 100% and87.5% respectively, and CTA showed 71.4% diagnostic accuracy for PASTA lesion. Conclusion: CTA was a useful tool and it was equivalent to MRA for the assessment of SST full thickness tear, SLAP lesion and PASTA lesion, but not bursal side partial tear. Thus, it may be used preferably to diagnose shoulder pathology and for follow up as an inexpensive tool after operation.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Chandnani VP, Yeager TD, DeBerardino T, et al.: Glenoid labral tears: prospective evaluation with MRI imaging, MR arthrography and CT arthrography. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 161: 1229-1235, 1993. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.161.6.8249731
  2. Charousset C, Bellaiche L, Duranthon LD, Grimberg J: Accuracy of CT arthrography in the assessment of tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 87: 824-828, 2005. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.01972
  3. Flannigan B, Kursunoglu-Brahme S, Snyder S, Karzel R, Del Pizzo W, Resnick D: MR arthrography of the shoulder: comparison with conventional MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 155: 829-832, 1990. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.155.4.2119117
  4. Fuchs B, Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Gerber C: Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: Assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resornance imaging. J shoulder Elbow Surg, 8: 599-605, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1058-2746(99)90097-6
  5. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Bernageau J, Lavau L, Voisin MC: Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures. Pre- and postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 304: 78-83, 1994.
  6. Hodler J, Kursunoglu-Brahme S, Snyder SJ, et al.: Rotator cuff disease: assessment with MR arthrography versus standard MR imaging in 36 patients with arthroscopic confirmation. Radiology, 182: 431-436, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.182.2.1489363
  7. Hu H, He HD, Foley WD, Fox SH: Four multidetector- row helical CT: image quality and volume coverage speed. Radiology, 215: 55-62, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.1.r00ap3755
  8. Karzel RP, Snyder SJ: Magnetic resornance arthrography of the shoulder. A new technique of shoulder imaging. Clin Sports Med, 12: 123-136, 1993.
  9. Kim JY, Oh JH, Gong HS, Kim WS, Choi JA, Kim BH: Multidetector CT arthrography in the evaluation of shoulder pathology: comparison with MR arthrography and MR imaging with arthroscopic correlation. J Korean Shoulder Elbow Soc, 9: 73-82, 2006. https://doi.org/10.5397/CiSE.2006.9.1.073
  10. Klingenbeck-Regn K, Schaller S, Flohr T, Ohnesorge B, Kopp AF, Baum U: Subsecond multi-slice computed tomography: basics and applications. Eur J Radiol, 31: 110-124, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0720-048X(99)00086-8
  11. Lambert A, Loffroy R, Guiu B, et al.: Rotator cuff tears: value of 3.0T MRI. J Radiol, 90: 583-588, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0221-0363(09)74024-7
  12. Lecouvet FE, Simoni P, KoutaI¨ssoff S, Vande Berg BC, Malghem J, Dubuc JE: Multidetector spiral CT arthrography of the shoulder Clinical applications and limits, with MR arthrography and arthroscopic correlations, Eur Radiol, 68: 120-136, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.025
  13. McCollough CH, Zink FE: Performance evaluation of a multi-slice CT system. Med Phys, 26: 2223-2230, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598777
  14. Nishii T, Tanaka H, Nakanishi K, Sugano N, Miki H, Yoshikawa H: Fat-Suppressed 3D Spoiled Gradient- Echo MRI and MDCT Arthrography of Articular Cartilage in Patients with Hip Dysplasia. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 185: 379-385, 2005. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.185.2.01850379
  15. Shuman WP: Gadolonium MR Arthrography of the Rotator Cuff. Semin Musculoskeletal Radiol, 2: 377- 384, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1080118
  16. Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE, Poilvache P, Maldague B, Malghem J: Spiral CT arthrography of the knee: technique and value in the assessment of internal derangement of the knee. Eur Radiol, 12: 1800-1810, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-002-1491-2
  17. Verhagen RA, Maas M, Dijkgraaf MG, Tol JL, Krips R, van Dijk CN: Prospective study on diagnostic strategies in osteochondral lesions of the talus. Is MRI superior to helical CT- J Bone Joint Surg Br, 87: 41-46, 2005. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02871
  18. Waldt S, Bruegel M, Ganter K, et al.: Comparison of multislice CT arthrography and MR arthrography for the detection of articular cartilage lesions of the elbow. Eur Radiol, 15: 784-791, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2585-9
  19. Warner JJ, Higgins L, Parsons IM IV, Dowdy P: Diagnosis and treatment of anterosuperior rotator cuff tears. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 10:37-46, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2001.112022
  20. Yum JK, Sin YW, Kim WS, Han JI: Preoperative three dimensional ultrasonographic evaluation of the rotator cuff tear. J Korean Shoulder Elbow Soc, 11: 24-28, 2008. https://doi.org/10.5397/CiSE.2008.11.1.024
  21. Yoo JC, Ahn JH, Yang JH, Koh KH, Choi SH, Yoon YC: Correlation of arthroscopic repairability of large to massive rotator cuff tears with preoperative magnetic resornance imaging scans. Arthroscopy, 25: 573- 582, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2008.12.015