MRI of shoulder after dislocation with<unk>  and labral Bankart's lesion<unk>  post-shoulder dislocation X-ray at left shows anterior dislocation in a young man after trying to get up from his bed. X-ray at right shows same shoulder after reduction and internal rotation, revealing both a Bankart lesion and a<unk> . Diagnosis can be suspected by history and physical examination which is usually followed by imaging. Because of the mechanism of injury, apprehension of anterior dislocation is common with provocative maneuvers.<unk> s have been classified as "engaging" or "non-engaging", with engaging lesions defined by the ability of the glenoid to sublux into the humeral head defect during abduction and external rotation. Engaging dislocations have a higher risk of recurrent anterior dislocation, and their presence can help guide surgical management. Imaging diagnosis conventionally begins with plain film radiography. Generally, anteroposterior (AP) radiographs of the shoulder with the arm in internal rotation offer the best yield while axillary views and AP radiographs with external rotation tend to obscure the defect. However, pain and tenderness in the injured joint make appropriate positioning difficult and in a recent study of plain film x-ray for<unk> s, the sensitivity was only about 20%. i.e. the finding was not visible on plain film x-ray about 80% of the time. By contrast, studies have shown the value of ultrasonography in diagnosing<unk> s. In a population with recurrent dislocation using findings at surgery as the gold standard, a sensitivity of 96% was demonstrated. In a second study of patients with continuing shoulder instability after trauma, and using double contrast CT as a gold standard, a sensitivity of over 95% was demonstrated for ultrasound. It should be borne in mind that in both those studies, patients were having continuing problems after initial injury, and therefore the presence of a<unk>  was more likely. Nevertheless, ultrasonography, which is noninvasive and free from radiation, offers important advantages. MRI has also been shown to be highly reliable for the diagnosis of<unk><unk>  (and Bankart) lesions. One study used challenging methodology. First of all, it applied to those patients with a single, or first time, dislocation. Such lesions were likely to be smaller and therefore more difficult to detect. Second, two radiologists, who were blinded to the surgical outcome, reviewed the MRI findings, while two orthopedic surgeons, who were blinded to the MRI findings, reviewed videotapes of the arthroscopic procedures. Coefficiency of agreement was then calculated for the MRI and arthroscopic findings and there was total agreement ( kappa = 1.0) for<unk><unk>  and Bankart lesions.
Hill–Sachs lesion
Olney's lesions
Janeway lesion
Bankart lesion
Rokitansky nodule
Elschnig spots
Cameron lesions
Butcher's wart