الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 120 |  |  |
| | | from | 120 | | |
Abstract
Meniscal injuries are the most common type of knee injuries.
MRI is the gold standard in the diagnosis of meniscal injuries. It does not involve radiation exposure. MRI was more sensitive in detecting and determining the types of tears than US. Thmajor drawbacks of routine MRI usage are the time and expense of the procedure. It may be uncomfortable for some people because it can produce claustrophobia. In addition, there are absolute contraindications such as cardiac pacemaker, cochlear implant, vascular clips and intra-occular foreign boby.
US is highly sensitive and specific in detection of meniscal tear in correlation to MRI. So, they can be used as non invasive, fast method for screening of patients with knee pain for meniscal tear.
Despite advantages, US is considered to be an operator-dependent technology.
The aim of this study is to compare between the accuracy of ultrasound and MRI in diagnosis of meniscal injury.
The ultrasound results evaluated the presence of meniscal tear by the presence or abscence of any hypo echoic band that can be seen within the meniscus.During the study, it was difficult to detect the type of meniscal tear by US.
According to MRI, 20 patients of the total 20 were positive for meniscal tear, the US diagnosed 17 of them.
In conclusion, US is a good screening method in knee injury with a high degree of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity in meniscal tears.