ArticleJournal of ultrasonography2025
Comparative analysis of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing pain in the posterolateral region of the ankle.
Article in Journal of ultrasonography, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between flat variants of the peroneus brevis tendon and split tears on magnetic resonance imaging.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Height and weight predict cross-sectional area of the peroneus brevis and longus tendons: Magnetic resonance imaging-based analysis of 164 adults.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasound compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a reference in detecting peroneus brevis split ruptures. Material and methods: We re-reviewed 112 ultrasound examinations performed between 2020 and 2021 by three musculoskeletal radiologists with 8-10 years of experience. Patients were referred due to pain lasting at least 8 months in the posterolateral ankle. Ultrasound was performed using a LOGIQ E9 General Electric device with a 6-15 MHz or 18 MHz probe. Sixty-three patients who underwent MRI within 8 months and were included in the study. Ultrasound and MRI findings were categorized as: a) no peroneus split, b) presence of peroneus split, or c) unspecific findings. MRI served as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated. Results: Seven cases (11.1%) were false positives (diagnosed on ultrasound but not MRI) and 9 (14.3%) were false negatives (missed by ultrasound but detected on MRI). Six cases (9.5%) were true positives (identified on both ultrasound and MRI), and 41 patients (65.1%) were true negatives (negative on both modalities). Ultrasound showed a sensitivity of 40.0% and specificity of 85.4%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 46.2%, while the negative predictive value (NPV) was 82.0%. Conclusions: Ultrasound demonstrated limited sensitivity but high specificity in detecting peroneus brevis split ruptures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.