Rotator Cuff Tendon Assessment in Symptomatic and Control Groups Using Quantitative MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Relatively weak correlations between patient symptoms and rotator cuff tendon (RCT) tearing have been reported; however, the relationship between symptoms and tendinosis has been less well‐studied. Purpose/Hypothesis To use quantitative MRI to assess the bilateral RCTs in shoulders of both patients with unilateral symptomatic tendinopathy and control subjects. We hypothesized that quantitative MRI measures would differ between symptomatic patients and controls. Study Type Prospective imaging study. Population/Subjects In all, 48 shoulders from 24 subjects (mean age, 32.8 years), including 14 patients with unilateral symptomatic tendinopathy and 10 asymptomatic controls. Field Strength/Sequence 3T/3D ultrashort echo time Cones sequence with magnetization transfer preparation (UTE‐Cones‐MT) and Carr–Purcell–Meiboom–Gill. Assessment Macromolecular fraction (MMF) and T 2 relaxation were measured in four regions of the superior RCT, including all‐segments, and lateral‐third, bursal‐sided, and articular‐sided segments. The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index and visual analog scale were assessed. Statistical Tests Three shoulder groups were evaluated, including symptomatic shoulders, contralateral asymptomatic shoulders in patients, and asymptomatic controls. MMF and T 2 values were compared between groups using a bootstrap‐based comparison of means. Results Significant differences were found in both MMF and T 2 values between symptomatic and control RCTs when analyzing all‐segments ( P = 0.027 and P = 0.006, respectively) and articular‐sided segments (both P = 0.001). Significant differences between asymptomatic RCTs in patients and control RCTs were also found, including MMF in all four anatomic regions analyzed ( P = 0.024–0.044), as well as T 2 in all‐segments ( P = 0.003), bursal‐sided segments ( P = 0.021), and articular‐sided segments ( P = 0.002). No significant differences in MMF ( P = 0.420–0.950) or T 2 ( P = 0.380–0.910) were seen between ipsilateral symptomatic and contralateral asymptomatic RCTs in patients. Data Conclusion Symptomatic RCTs showed significantly lower MMF values and higher T 2 values compared with control RCTs. In patients with unilateral symptomatic tendinopathy, the contralateral shoulder can demonstrate asymptomatic tendinopathy, which can be quantified using MMF or T 2 . Evidence Level 2 Technical Efficacy Stage 2. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;52:864–872.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".