English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Medical technology sometimes obscures the importance of history taking and clinical examination, though in reality history and clinical methods are indispensable part of any patient management. In this prospective cohort study in age group between 15 and 65 years, we have compared between clinical, MRI, and arthroscopic findings in respect to menisci injuries and searched whether negative MRI findings can lead to denial of arthroscopy in suspected menisci injuries. All the patients undergone a clinical battery of tests. Subsequently MRI has been done on all the 40 subjects, and finally arthroscopy has been done. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of each individual test were calculated and compared with the results of MRI. For medial meniscus injury clinical diagnostic accuracy-80% and MRI diagnostic accuracy is 82.5%.For lateral meniscus injury clinical diagnosis has diagnostic accuracy 75% and MRI has got diagnostic accuracy of 82.5%. Level of evidence-Level-IV.

Clinical, MRI and arthroscopic correlation in menisci injuries