Abstract
When compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US) performed by experienced users is an inexpensive tool that has good sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing rotator cuff (RC) tears. However, many practitioners are now utilizing in-office US with little to no formal training as an adjunct to clinical evaluation in the management of RC pathology. The purpose of our study was to determine if US without formal training is effective in managing patients with a suspected RC tear.
This was a single centre prospective observational study. Five fellowship-trained surgeons each examined 50 participants referred for a suspected RC tear (n= 250). Patients were screened prior to the consultation and were included if ≥ 40 years old, had an MRI of their affected shoulder, had failed conservative treatment of at least 6 months, and had ongoing pain and disability. Patients were excluded if they had glenohumeral instability, evidence of major joint trauma, or osteonecrosis. After routine clinical exam, surgeons recorded their treatment plan (“No Surgery”, “Uncertain”, or “Surgery”). Surgeons then performed an in-office diagnostic US followed by an MRI and documented their treatment plan after each imaging study. Interrater reliability was analyzed using a kappa statistic to compare clinical to ultrasound findings and ultrasound findings to MRI, normal and abnormal categorization of biceps, supraspinatus, and subscapularis.
Following clinical assessment, the treatment plan was recorded as “No Surgery” in 90 (36%), “Uncertain” in 96 (39%) of cases, “Surgery” in 61 (25%) cases, and incomplete in 3 (2%). In-office US allowed resolution of 68 (71%) of uncertain cases with 227 (88%) of patients having a definitive treatment plan. No patients in the “No Surgery” group had a change in treatment plan. After MRI, 16 (6%) patients in the “No Surgery” crossed-over to the “Surgery” group after identification of full-thickness tears, larger than expected tears or alternate pathology (e.g., labral tear).
The combination of clinical examination and in-office US may be an effective method in the initial management of patients with suspected rotator cuff pathology. Using this method, a definitive diagnosis and treatment plan was established in 88% of patients with the remaining 12% requiring an MRI. A small percentage (6%) of patients with larger than expected full-thickness rotator cuff tears and/or alternate glenohumeral pathology (e.g., labral tear) would be missed at initial evaluation.
