ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2025
Bone bruise assessment in knees with ACL lesions: semi-quantitative scores outperform quantitative evaluation.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBone bruise is a common consequence of trauma. Its presence, size, and shape correlate with articular damage and symptoms evolution. Purpose of this study was to identify, among the most used quantitative and semi-quantitative evaluation strategies, the most reliable method to evaluate bone bruise in knees with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.
methodsKnee Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of 100 ACL-injured patients were selected. Bone bruise characteristics were assessed by five different evaluators applying Whole Organ Magnetic Resonance Scoring (WORMS) and MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score (MOAKS). Bone bruise area was measured freehand using Intellispace
resultsBone bruise presence was reported in 63-65% of cases in the lateral femoral condyle, 42-48% in the medial femoral condyle, 80-82% in the lateral tibial plateau, 53-61% in the tibial sulcus, and 40-42% in the medial tibial plateau, with a substantial to almost perfect agreement (Fleiss-k 0.67-0.89). Inter-rater agreement was classified as moderate for WORMS and MOAKS (Fleiss-k = 0.46 and 0.45, respectively), while the area measurement resulted in a poor agreement (ICC = 0.44). Intra-rater agreement was classified as almost perfect for WORMS and MOAKS (Fleiss-k = 0.91 and 0.90, respectively), while the area measurement resulted in a good agreement (ICC = 0.79).
conclusionsSemi-quantitative scores outperformed the quantitative evaluation of bone bruise. WORMS and MOAKS both resulted in a moderate inter-rater agreement, while bone bruise area assessment showed poor reliability. Intra-rater reliability confirmed the advantages of the semi-quantitative approach versus the quantitative one, being good for the area measurement while almost perfect when both WORMS and MOAKS scores were used to assess bone bruise in ACL-injured knees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40377718What 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.