Prospective study to compare and correlate the clinical, MRI, and arthroscopic finding in patients with knee injuries

Aim and Objective: To compare and correlate the clinical, MRI, and arthroscopic findings in patients with knee injuries. Introduction: Internal derangement of the knee (traumatic or degenerative) are a very common entity. Diagnostic modalities used most commonly to assess and evaluate joint injuries are arthroscopy and MRI. Arthroscopy, though invasive and can cause complications, is considered a gold standard. MRI has now been accepted as the best imaging modality for the non-invasive evaluation of knee injuries. Arthroscopy is the gold standard. Material and Methods: 48 patients (50 knees) with a history of knee injuries taken, detailed history, and relevant clinical examination of all the subjects were recorded. All patients underwent MR Imaging and arthroscopy and considering arthroscopy as the gold standard, Clinical findings were compared with MRI and arthroscopic findings. Results: The accuracy of MRI Knee for ACL, PCL, Medial meniscus, and Lateral meniscus injuries when compared with arthroscopy was 90.0%, 94.0%, 78.0%, and 90.0%. The accuracy of clinical examination for ACL, PCL, Medial meniscus, and Lateral meniscus injuries, when compared with arthroscopy, was 92.0%, 100.0%, 74.0%, and 90.0%. The accuracy of clinical examination for ACL, PCL, Medial meniscus, and Lateral meniscus injuries, when compared with MRI findings, was 92.0%, 100.0%, 96.0%, and 92.0%. 48 cases (50 knees) with a mean age of 31.90 years (18-55 yr). All the subjects of our study were of active age group with a peak incidence of 29.2% occurring in the age group 21- 30 years. Right knee (60%) involved more than left with male (70%) predominance females (30%), male to female ratio of 2.3:1. The present study showed that sports injuries accounted for the highest number of patients (58%) followed by slipping injuries and roadside accidents (36%). Conclusion: In conclusion, the present study supports that the clinical examination if done properly has almost the same value as MRI (which is a useful non-invasive modality having high diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and negative predictive value, making it a very reliable screening test for diagnosing ligamentous and meniscus injuries). MRI is unique in its ability to evaluate the structures not accessible on arthroscopy like evaluation of bone contusions and collateral ligaments.