Comparisons of the Various Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears on MR Arthrography and Arthroscopic Correlation

OBJECTIVE To assess the diagnostic performance of MR arthrography in the diagnosis of the various types of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears by comparing the MR imaging findings with the arthroscopic findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS The series of MR arthrography studies included 202 patients consisting of 100 patients with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears proved by arthroscopy and a control group of 102 patients with arthroscopically intact rotator cuffs, which were reviewed in random order. At arthroscopy, 54 articular-sided, 26 bursal-sided, 20 both articular- and bursal-sided partial-thickness tears were diagnosed. The MR arthrographies were analyzed by two radiologists for articular-sided tears, bursal-sided tears, and both articular- and bursal-sided tears of the rotator cuff. The sensitivity and specificity of each type of partial-thickness tears were determined. Kappa statistics was calculated to determine the inter- and intra-observer agreement of the diagnosis of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears. RESULTS The sensitivity and specificity of the various types of rotator cuff tears were 85% and 90%, respectively for articular-sided tears, 62% and 95% for bursal-sided tears, as well as 45% and 99% for both articular- and bursal-sided tears. False-negative assessments were primarily observed in the diagnosis of bursal-sided tears. Conversely, both articular- and bursal-sided tears were overestimated as full-thickness tears. Inter-observer agreement was excellent for the diagnosis of articular-sided tears (k = 0.70), moderate (k = 0.59) for bursal-sided tears, and fair (k = 0.34) for both articular- and bursal-sided tears, respectively. Intra-observer agreement for the interpretation of articular- and bursal-sided tears was excellent and good, respectively, whereas intra-observer agreement for both articular- and bursal-sided tears was moderate. CONCLUSION MR arthrography is a useful diagnostic tool for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears, but has limitations in that it has low sensitivity in bursal- and both articular- and bursal-sided tears. In addition, it shows only fair inter-observer agreement when it comes to predicting both articular- and bursal-sided tears.