Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026

Author Spotlight: Minimally Invasive Ultrasound-Guided Acupotomy in Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment
Published on: April 26, 2024
MRI versus ultrasonography to assess meniscal abnormalities in acute knees
James L Cook1, Cristi R Cook1, James P Stannard2
1Comparative Orthopaedic Laboratory, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.
Abstract:
While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is often considered the "gold standard" diagnostic imaging modality for detection of meniscal abnormalities, it is associated with misdiagnosis in as high as 47% of cases, is costly, and is not readily available to a large number of patients. Ultrasonographic examination of the knee has been reported to be an effective diagnostic tool for this purpose with the potential to overcome many of the shortcomings of MRI. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical usefulness of ultrasonography for diagnosis of meniscal pathology in patients with acute knee pain and compare its diagnostic accuracy to MRI in a clinical setting. With Institutional Review Board approval, patients (n = 71) with acute knee pain were prospectively enrolled with informed consent. Preoperative MRI (1.5 T) was performed on each affected knee using the hospital's standard equipment and protocols and read by faculty radiologists trained in musculoskeletal MRI. Ultrasonographic assessments of each affected knee were performed by one of two faculty members trained in musculoskeletal ultrasonography using a 10 to 14 MHz linear transducer. Arthroscopic evaluation of affected knees was performed by one of three faculty orthopedic surgeons to assess and record all joint pathology, which served as the reference standard for determining presence, type, and severity of meniscal pathology. All evaluators for each diagnostic modality were blinded to all other data. Data were collected and compared by a separate investigator to determine sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), correct classification rate (CCR), likelihood ratios (LR[+] and LR[-]), and odds ratios. Preoperative ultrasonographic assessment of meniscal pathology was associated with Sn = 91.2%, Sp = 84.2%, PPV = 94.5%, NPV = 76.2%, CCR = 89.5%, LR(+) = 5.78, and LR(-) = 0.10. Preoperative MRI assessment of meniscal pathology was associated with Sn = 91.7%, Sp = 66.7%, PPV = 84.6%, NPV = 80.0%, CCR = 81.1%, LR(+) = 2.75, and LR(-) = 0.13. Ultrasonography was two times more likely than MRI to correctly determine presence or absence of meniscal pathology seen arthroscopically in this study. Ultrasonography is a useful tool for diagnosis of meniscal pathology with potential advantages over MRI. Based on these data and available portable equipment, ultrasonography could be considered for use as a point-of-injury diagnostic modality for meniscal injuries.
Insights
Ultrasonography demonstrates high accuracy in diagnosing meniscal pathology in patients with acute knee pain, offering a valuable alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study found ultrasonography to be more effective than MRI for identifying meniscal injuries.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedics
- Diagnostic Imaging
- Musculoskeletal Radiology
Background:
- Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the standard for meniscal abnormality detection but has high misdiagnosis rates (up to 47%), is expensive, and has limited availability.
- Ultrasonography presents a potentially effective and accessible alternative for diagnosing knee meniscal pathology, addressing MRI's limitations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the clinical utility and diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for meniscal pathology in acute knee pain patients.
- To compare ultrasonography's diagnostic performance against MRI in a clinical setting, using arthroscopy as the reference standard.
Main Methods:
- Prospective study of 71 patients with acute knee pain, undergoing preoperative MRI and ultrasonography.
- Arthroscopic evaluation served as the gold standard for meniscal pathology assessment.
- Evaluators were blinded to other diagnostic data; statistical analysis included sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values.
Main Results:
- Ultrasonography showed high diagnostic accuracy: sensitivity 91.2%, specificity 84.2%, positive predictive value 94.5%, negative predictive value 76.2%, and correct classification rate 89.5%.
- MRI results were: sensitivity 91.7%, specificity 66.7%, positive predictive value 84.6%, negative predictive value 80.0%, and correct classification rate 81.1%.
- Ultrasonography was twice as likely as MRI to correctly identify meniscal pathology compared to arthroscopic findings.
Conclusions:
- Ultrasonography is a clinically useful tool for diagnosing meniscal pathology, offering advantages over MRI in terms of accuracy and potential accessibility.
- Given its performance and portability, ultrasonography could serve as a valuable point-of-care diagnostic modality for acute meniscal injuries.
Related Concept Videos
Ultrasonography
During an ultrasonography procedure, a handheld device called...
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies IV: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies I: CT and MRI
Description of the Procedures
Computed Tomography (CT) scan:
Computed Tomography (CT) scans use X-ray technology to generate detailed images of bones, organs, and tissues. During the scan, the patient lies on a moving table...
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System IV: CMRI
Imaging Studies II: Ultrasonography

