Higher sensitivity with the lever sign test for diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament rupture in the emergency department.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic value of the "lever sign test" to diagnose ACL rupture and to compare this test to the two most commonly used, the Lachman and anterior drawer test. METHOD: This prospective study was performed in the ED of the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (Brussels, Belgium) from March 2017 to May 2019. 52 patients were included undergoing knee trauma, within 8 days, with an initial radiograph excluding a fracture (except Segond fracture or tibial spine fracture). On clinical investigation, patients showed a positive lever sign test and/or a positive Lachman test and/or a positive anterior drawer test. Exclusion criteria were a complete rupture of the knee extensor mechanism and patellar dislocation. All the physicians involved in this study were residents in training. An MRI was performed within 3 weeks for all included patients after the clinical examination. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were investigated for all three tests with MRI used as our reference standard. RESULTS: Forty out of 52 patients suffered an ACL rupture (77%) and 12 did not (23%). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of the lever sign test were respectively 92.5%, 25% 82% and 50%. Those of the Lachman test were 54%, 54.5%, 81% and 25%, and those of the anterior drawer test were 56%, 82%, 90.5% and 37.5%. Twelve out of 40 ACL ruptures (30%) were diagnosed exclusively with a positive lever sign test. CONCLUSION: When investigating acute ACL ruptures (< 8 days) in the ED, the lever sign test offers a sensitivity of 92.5%, far superior to that of other well-known clinical tests. The lever sign test is relatively pain-free, easy to perform and its visual interpretation requires less experience. Positive lever sign test at the ED should lead to an MRI to combine high clinical sensitivity with high MRI specificity.

MRI versus 18F-FDG-PET/CT for detecting bone marrow involvement in multiple myeloma: diagnostic performance and clinical relevance.

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance of MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT in detecting bone marrow involvement (BMI) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by our Institutional Review Board. Two radiologists and two nuclear medicine specialists independently and blindly reviewed 84 pairs of MRI and PET/CT scans obtained in 73 MM patients. Readers assessed the presence and patterns of BMI. The best valuable comparator (BVC) for BMI was established by a panel review of all baseline and follow-up imaging, and biological and pathological information. Intra- and inter-reader agreement and correlation between MRI and PET/CT were assessed using the prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (k) coefficient. Diagnostic performance of MRI and PET/CT in detecting BMI was evaluated from ROC characteristics. Association between imaging and biological, pathological, and clinical findings was assessed using Wilcoxon rank-sum and chi-square tests. RESULTS: Intra- and inter-reader agreement was very good for MRI (k = 0.90 [0.81; 1.00] and 0.88 [0.78; 0.98]). Intra- and inter-reader agreement was good for PET/CT (k = 0.80 [0.69; 0.91] and 0.71 [0.56; 0.86]). The sensitivity of MRI to detect BMI (97% [90%; 100%]) was significantly superior to that of PET/CT (76% [64%; 85%]) (p < 0.001). The specificity of MRI (86% [57%; 98%]) was lower than that of PET/CT (93% [66%; 100%]), without reaching statistical significance (p = 0.32). There was a strong correlation between decisions regarding patient management and PET/CT findings (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MRI is significantly more sensitive than PET/CT to detect BMI in MM. Patient management is more strongly correlated with PET/CT findings. KEY POINTS: • MRI and PET/CT have very close diagnostic value for the detection of bone marrow involvement in multiple myeloma. • MRI has a significantly higher sensitivity and better reproducibility. • PET/CT findings appear to have a higher impact on clinical decisions.