Correlation of pathological findings detected by preoperative magnetic resonance with intraoperative pathological findings in patients who had shoulder arthroscopy

Correlation of Pathological Findings Detected by Preoperative Magnetic Resonance with Intraoperative Pathological Findings in Patients who had Shoulder Arthroscopy Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate on which extent Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports and arthroscopic surgery notes overlap by reviewing the surgery notes and imaging findings retrospectively. Data obtained would enable to provide information on efficiency of magnetic resonance images on deciding arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Material and Method: The present study was conducted retrospectively on 90 patients who referred due to shoulder complaints and had surgical procedure. Age, gender, pathological shoulder side, acromion type, bone pathologies (humerus, distal clavicle, glenoid), joint spaces, cartilage loss, edema, osteophytic degeneration, existence of acromioclavicular joint pathology, rotator muscle tears (supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor and subscapularis), biceps degeneration, superior labrum anterior to posterior lesion, integrity of rotator cuff, bursitis, fluid collection and visual analogue scale data of patients enrolled were reviewed. Magnetic resonance imaging findings and postoperative outcomes were compared. Findings: The age average of the patients enrolled into the study was 55.3±11.5 years; 52.2% of the patients were male. The prevalence of right joint involvement was detected as 68.9%. There was not any difference between arthroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging for indicating pathologies on the humerus, distal clavicle and glenoid (p>0.05). The most common acromion type was Type 1; the prevalence of Type 3 was significantly higher by arthroscopy (p<0.05); the compliance between methods was moderate. It was detected that arthroscopy was superior for joint space, cartilage loss, edema, and osteophytic degeneration (p<0.05), and the compliance between methods was moderate to higher. There was not any difference between methods for indicating the acromioclavicular joint pathology (p>0.05); the compliance between methods were detected insignificant. There was not any difference between methods for supraspinatus tear, infraspinatus tear, superior labrum anterior to posterior lesion and rotator cuff tendon integrity (p>0.05); the compliance between methods were detected insignificant. Although arthroscopy was more successful to address subscapularis tears and biceps degeneration (p<0.05), the compliance was detected as lower to moderate. There was not any difference between arthroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging for indicating bursitis and fluid collection (p>0.05); the compliance between methods was at insignificant level. Visual analogue scale scores of the patients were detected significantly lower on 60 day after the surgical procedure. Conclusion: Arthroscopy was detected superior to magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of lesions causing shoulder pathologies. It was detected that subscapularis tendon ruptures are especially diagnosed less than other pathologies detected in magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic resonance imaging findings are highly consistent with arthroscopy results in some diagnoses; however, they are insufficient when the patient was considered as a whole. Key Words: shoulder, arthroscopy, magnetic resonance