PDF herunterladen
Sportverletz Sportschaden 2012; 26(1): 21-26
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1281839
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Intra- und interobserver Variabilität sonografischer Untersuchungen an Patella- und Achillessehnen

Intra- and interrater Variability of Sonographic Investigations of Patella and Achilles Tendons
M. Cassel
,
S. Müller
,
A. Carlsohn
,
H. Baur
,
N. Jerusel
,
F. Mayer
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
24. Februar 2012 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Obwohl die Sonografie in der Diagnostik von Läsionen an Achilles- und Patellasehnen etabliert ist, liegen bislang nur wenige Daten zu Gütekriterien dieser Messungen vor. Ziel der Studie war es daher, die Reliabilität in der Bestimmung des Sehnendurchmessers bzw. in der Darstellung struktureller Veränderungen zu untersuchen.

Material und Methoden: Bei 14 gesunden Freizeitsportlern wurden je beide Achilles- (AS) und Patellasehnen (PS) im Test-Retest-Design durch zwei Untersucher sonografiert. Neben antero-posteriorem (a.p.-) und mediolateralem (m.l.-) Durchmesser wurde das Auftreten von Hypoechogenitäten und Vaskularisationen erfasst. Es erfolgte die deskriptive Analyse mit Kalkulation von Test-Retest-Variabilität (TRV), Intraclass-Correlation-Coefficient (ICC) und Bland und Altman’s Plots mit Bias und 95 % Limits of Agreement (LOA).

Ergebnisse: Die intra- und interobserver Differenzen von AS- und PS-a.p.-Durchmesser variierten von 0,2 – 1,2 mm, die der AS- und PS-m.l-Durchmesser von 0,7 – 5,1 mm. Bei 24 % der geschallten Sehnen waren Hypoechogenitäten sichtbar, in 15 % der untersuchten Sehnen wurden Vaskularisationen beobachtet. Die Bestimmung des intra-observer AS-a.p.-Durchmessers zeigte lediglich geringe Abweichungen (TRV 4,5 – 7,4 %; ICC 0,60 – 0,84; Bias −0,05 – 0,07 mm; LOA −0,6 – 0,5 bis −1,1 – 1,0 mm), während AS- und PS-m.l.-Durchmesser zwischen den Untersuchern stärker variierten (TRV 13,7 – 19,7 %; ICC 0,11 – 0,20; Bias −1,4 – 4,3 mm; LOA −5,5 – 2,7 bis −10,5 – 1,9 mm).

Schlussfolgerung: Der AS- und PS-a.p.-Durchmesser sind zuverlässig zu bestimmende Parameter. Demgegenüber ist die reliable Erfassung der Sehnenbreite von Achilles- und Patellasehnen erschwert. Hypoechogenitäten und Vaskularisationen sind bereits in klinisch unauffälligen Sehnen darstellbar.

Abstract

Background: Clinical examinations of tendon disorders routinely include ultrasound examinations, despite the fact that availability of data concerning validity criteria of these measurements are limited. The present study therefore aims to evaluate the reliability of measurements of Achilles- and Patella tendon diameter and in the detection of structural adaptations.

Materials and Methods: In 14 healthy, recreationally active subjects both asymptomatic Achilles (AT) and patella tendons (PT) were measured twice by two examiners in a test-retest design. Besides the detection of anteroposterior (a.p.-) and mediolateral (m.l.-) diameters, areas of hypoechogenicity and neovascularisation were registered. Data were analysed descriptively with calculation of test-retest variability (TRV), intraclass-correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland and Altman’s plots with bias and 95 % limits of agreement (LOA).

Results: Intra- and interrater differences of AT- and PT-a.p.-diameter varied from 0.2 – 1.2 mm, those of AT- and PT-m.l-diameter from 0.7 – 5.1 mm. Areas of hypoechogenicity were visible in 24 % of the tendons, while 15 % showed neovascularisations. Intrarater AT-a.p. -diameters showed sparse deviations (TRV 4.5 – 7.4 %; ICC 0.60 – 0.84; bias −0.05 – 0.07 mm; LOA −0.6 – 0.5 to −1.1 – 1.0 mm), while interrater AT- and PT-m.l.-diameters were highly variable (TRV 13.7 – 19.7 %; ICC 0.11 – 0.20; bias −1.4 – 4.3 mm; LOA −5.5 – 2.7 to −10.5 – 1.9 mm).

Conclusion: Our results suggest that the measurement of AT- and PT-a.p. -diameters is a reliable parameter. In contrast, reproducibility of AT- and PT-m.l.-diameters is questionable. The study corroborates the presence of hypoechogenicity and neovascularisation in asymptomatic tendons.

Schlüsselwörter

Ultraschall - Achillessehne - Patellasehne - Intra- und interobserver Variabilität - Sehnendurchmesser

Key words

ultrasound - Achilles tendon - Patella tendon - intra- and inter-rater variability - tendon diameter
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Fredberg U, Bolvig L, Andersen NT et al. Ultrasonography in evaluation of Achilles and Patella tendon thickness. Ultraschall in Med 2008; 29: 60-65
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Schmidt WA, Schmidt H, Schicke B et al. Standard reference values for musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63: 988-994
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Khan KM, Forster BB, Robinson J et al. Are ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging of value in assessment of Achilles tendon disorders? A two year prospective study. . Br J Sports Med 2003; 37: 149-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ohberg L, Lorentzon R, Alfredson H. Neovascularisation in Achilles tendons with painful tendinosis but not in normal tendons: an ultrasonographic investigation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2001; 9: 233-238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Reiter M, Ulreich N, Dirisamer A et al. Colour and power Doppler sonography in symptomatic Achilles tendon disease. Int J Sports Med 2004; 25: 301-305
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Fornage BD, Rifkin MD, Touche DH et al. Sonography of the patellar tendon: preliminary observations. Am J Roentgenol 1984; 143: 179-182
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Fornage BD. Achilles tendon. US examination. Radiology 1986; 159: 759-764
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Leung JL, Griffith JF. Sonography of chronic Achilles tendinopathy: a case-control study. J Clin Ultrasound 2008; 36: 27-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ying M, Yeung E, Li B et al. Sonographic evaluation of the size of Achilles tendon: the effect of exercise and dominance of the ankle. Ultrasound Med Biol 2003; 29: 637-642
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Richards PJ, Win T, Jones PW. The distribution of microvascular response in Achilles tendonopathy assessed by colour and power Doppler. Skeletal Radiol 2005; 34: 336-342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Richards PJ, McCall IW, Day C et al. Longitudinal microvascularity in Achilles tendinopathy (power Doppler ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging time-intensity curves and the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles questionnaire): a pilot study. Skeletal Radiol 2010; 39: 509-521
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Malliaras P, Richards PJ, Garau G et al. Achilles tendon Doppler flow may be associated with mechanical loading among active athletes. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36: 2210-2215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 van Snellenberg W, Wiley JP, Brunet G. Achilles tendon pain intensity and level of neovascularization in athletes as determined by color Doppler ultrasound. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2007; 17: 530-534
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sengkerij PM, de Vos RJ, Weir A et al. Interobserver reliability of neovascularization score using power Doppler ultrasonography in midportion achilles tendinopathy. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 1627-1631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Zanetti M, Metzdorf A, Kundert HP et al. Achilles tendons: clinical relevance of neovascularization diagnosed with power Doppler US. Radiology 2003; 227: 556-560
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hirschmüller A, Frey V, Deibert P et al. Achilles Tendon Power Doppler Sonography in 953 Long Distance Runners – A Cross Sectional Study. Ultraschall in Med 2010; DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1245189.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Pang BS, Ying M. Sonographic measurement of achilles tendons in asymptomatic subjects: variation with age, body height, and dominance of ankle. J Ultrasound Med 2006; 25: 1291-1296
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med 1998; 26: 217-238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-310
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hing WA, Rome K, Cameron AF. Reliability of measuring abductor hallucis muscle parameters using two different diagnostic ultrasound machines. J Foot Ankle Res 2009; 2: 33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Muller S, Baur H, Konig T et al. Reproducibility of isokinetic single- and multi-joint strength measurements in healthy and injured athletes. Isokinetics and Exercise Science 2007; 15: 295-302
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Bartolotta TV, Taibbi A, Malizia G et al. Real-time spatial compound sonography of Achilles tendon in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia and normal physical examination. Radiol Med 2007; 112: 562-571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Puig JG, de Miguel E, Castillo MC et al. Asymptomatic hyperuricemia: impact of ultrasonography. Nucleosides Nucleotides Nucleic Acids 2008; 27: 592-595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Boesen MI, Boesen A, Koenig MJ et al. Ultrasonographic investigation of the Achilles tendon in elite badminton players using color Doppler. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34: 2013-2021
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 de Vos RJ, Weir A, Cobben LP et al. The value of power Doppler ultrasonography in Achilles tendinopathy: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35: 1696-1701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ohberg L, Alfredson H. Ultrasound guided sclerosis of neovessels in painful chronic Achilles tendinosis: pilot study of a new treatment. Br J Sports Med 2002; 36: 173-175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Richards PJ, Dheer AK, McCall IM. Achilles tendon (TA) size and power Doppler ultrasound (PD) changes compared to MRI: a preliminary observational study. Clin Radiol 2001; 56: 843-850
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar