Dr. Atiq Ahmad, Dr. Maryam Latif, Dr. Pervez Rashid Birmani
Aim: To correlate the results of clinical evaluation, radiographic and MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) results with surgical results. Recommend some approaches in the diagnostic assessment of a damaged knee. Study design: A comparative diagnostic study. Headquarters: In the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Nishtar Hospital Multan for six months duration from September 2019 to February 2020. Patients and methods: Fifty patients (41 men and 9 women) were enrolled in this study with clinical suspicion of internal damage in the injured knee. Clinical evaluation, normal x-ray and MRI were recorded for each patient. Reports on surgical results were collected in all cases. In each case, a correlation was made between clinical results, normal X-ray and MRI, and surgical results. Results: Normal x-rays had a very limited role in assessing knee soft tissue damage. Clinical evaluation raised suspicions of certain internal disorders, but did not detect a precise change. There was no significant difference between MRI and surgical results. Magnetic resonance imaging was found to have a sensitivity of 92%, a specificity of 50% and an accuracy of 89.28% to visualize damage to ACL (anterior cruciate ligament). It had a sensitivity of 89.28%, a specificity of 66.67% and an accuracy of 87.09% in detecting meniscus tears. It had an overall sensitivity of 93.18%, a specificity of 16.67% and an accuracy of 84% for imaging an internal disorder. Conclusions: Magnetic resonance imaging is much better than ordinary radiography and is better than clinical evaluation and has high sensitivity, precision and positive predictive value. Key words: damaged knee, flat radiography, clinical evaluation, magnetic resonance imaging.