Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 23(1): 724, 2022 Jul 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35906573

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Demographic change entails an increasing incidence of fragility fractures. Dual-energy CT (DECT) with virtual non-calcium (VNCa) reconstructions has been introduced as a promising diagnostic method for evaluating bone microarchitecture and marrow simultaneously. This study aims to define the most accurate cut-off value in Hounsfield units (HU) for discriminating the presence and absence of bone marrow edema (BME) in sacral fragility fractures. METHODS: Forty-six patients (40 women, 6 men; 79.7 ± 9.2 years) with suspected fragility fractures of the sacrum underwent both DECT (90 kVp / 150 kVp with tin prefiltration) and MRI. Nine regions-of-interest were placed in each sacrum on DECT-VNCa images. The resulting 414 HU measurements were stratified into "edema" (n = 80) and "no edema" groups (n = 334) based on reference BME detection in T2-weighted MRI sequences. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated to determine the desired cut-off value and an associated conspicuity range for edema detection. RESULTS: The mean density within the "edema" group of measurements (+ 3.1 ± 8.3 HU) was substantially higher compared to the "no edema" group (-51.7 ± 21.8 HU; p < 0.010). Analysis in DECT-VNCa images suggested a cut-off value of -12.9 HU that enabled sensitivity and specificity of 100% for BME detection compared to MRI. A range of HU values between -14.0 and + 20.0 is considered indicative of BME in the sacrum. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative analysis of DECT-VNCa with a cut-off of -12.9 HU allows for excellent diagnostic accuracy in the assessment of sacral fragility fractures with associated BME. A diagnostic "one-stop-shop" approach without additional MRI is feasible.


Assuntos
Doenças da Medula Óssea , Fraturas Ósseas , Lesões do Pescoço , Osteoporose , Fraturas da Coluna Vertebral , Medula Óssea/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças da Medula Óssea/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças da Medula Óssea/etiologia , Edema/diagnóstico por imagem , Edema/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Osteoporose/complicações , Osteoporose/diagnóstico por imagem , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Fraturas da Coluna Vertebral/complicações , Fraturas da Coluna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagem , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X/métodos
2.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ; 140(4): 473-480, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31612336

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: As the average age of society increases, so does the number of cases of fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can visualise associated oedema and is thus the gold standard for diagnosing such fractures. MRI, however, is costly, not always available, and involves certain exclusion criteria. Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) appears to be a promising alternative. It is unclear, however, whether it could be used for diagnosing FFP with similar sensitivity/specificity. The aim of our study was thus to compare conventional CT and DECT with MRI in cases of suspected FFP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 46 patients with suspected FFP underwent MRI, CT and DECT scans. There were three comparison groups for each of these patients: conventional CT image analysis without dual-energy modification (Arm 1), DECT analysis (Arm 2) and MRI as the gold standard (Arm 3). Diagnosis and FFP classification were performed by a radiologist in random order and without clinical information. The sensitivity and specificity of conventional CT and DECT were calculated in comparison with MRI as the reference standard. RESULTS: With 100% sensitivity and specificity, DECT is on par with MRI when it comes to diagnosing fragility fractures of the pelvis and is superior to conventional CT (90.3% sensitivity, 100% specificity). In terms of classification as well, there were no differences between DECT and MRI. On conventional CT, on the other hand, 16 patients were classified differently than they were on MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows DECT to be reliable and superior to conventional CT in terms of oedema detection and specific fracture classification in FFP. DECT thus combines the advantages of conventional CT (good visualisation of bone matter) and MRI (medullary cavity and visualisation of occult fractures).


Assuntos
Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Fraturas por Osteoporose/diagnóstico por imagem , Ossos Pélvicos/diagnóstico por imagem , Ossos Pélvicos/lesões , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA