AIM: We evaluated the contribution of SPECT/CT as an adjunct to combined three-phase bone scintigraphy (planar and SPECT) for diagnosing and localizing bone infection. Subsequently, the diagnostic performance of SPECT/CT was compared to visual fusion of SPECT with data of additional CT, X-ray, or MRI studies (SPECT + CT/X-ray/MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients suspected of bone infection, presenting pathological findings on triple-phase bone scintigraphy, underwent additional SPECT/CT. The SPECT/CT-technology combines the acquisition of SPECT and CT data with the same imaging device enabling perfect overlay of anatomical and functional images. (99m)Tc-DPD was used as radiopharmaceutical in all patients. For data analysis findings of bone scintigraphy (planar scans as well as SPECT) were categorized as positive, negative, or equivocal for the presence of osteomyelitis. In a second step, they were compared with SPECT/CT and SPECT + CT/X-ray/MRI with respect to localization and classification of lesions. Validation was achieved by surgery, biopsy, or by clinical follow up over at least 9 months including microbiological and radiological findings. RESULTS: Three-phase bone scan (incl. SPECT) correctly classified 7 lesions as positive and 11 lesions as negative for osteomyelitis. Six scans were interpreted false positive, two false negative, and five as equivocal. Rating the latter as positive for osteomyelitis, sensitivity of bone scan was (78%), specificity (50%). SPECT/CT was true positive in 7 patients, and true negative in 19. There were two false positive and two false negative findings, one scan was equivocal (sensitivity 78%, specificity 86%). Definition of anatomical localization of inflammatory foci was much easier by SPECT/CT due to better depiction of underlying anatomical details. SPECT + CT/X-ray/MRI yielded the highest sensitivity (100% compared to 78% of SPECT/CT), if equivocal findings (5/31 compared to 1/31 for SPECT/CT) are rated as true positive for osteomyelitis. Among radiological techniques, MRI (2 x FP) and CT (2 x FN) proved equal and expectedly superior to X-ray in delivering the correct diagnosis. CONCLUSION: SPECT/CT improves the diagnostic performance of three-phase bone scan for osteomyelitis by avoiding false positive or equivocal results. An additional benefit over visual fusion of SPECT with X-ray, CT, or MRI studies could not be confirmed in our study.
AIM: We evaluated the contribution of SPECT/CT as an adjunct to combined three-phase bone scintigraphy (planar and SPECT) for diagnosing and localizing bone infection. Subsequently, the diagnostic performance of SPECT/CT was compared to visual fusion of SPECT with data of additional CT, X-ray, or MRI studies (SPECT + CT/X-ray/MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients suspected of bone infection, presenting pathological findings on triple-phase bone scintigraphy, underwent additional SPECT/CT. The SPECT/CT-technology combines the acquisition of SPECT and CT data with the same imaging device enabling perfect overlay of anatomical and functional images. (99m)Tc-DPD was used as radiopharmaceutical in all patients. For data analysis findings of bone scintigraphy (planar scans as well as SPECT) were categorized as positive, negative, or equivocal for the presence of osteomyelitis. In a second step, they were compared with SPECT/CT and SPECT + CT/X-ray/MRI with respect to localization and classification of lesions. Validation was achieved by surgery, biopsy, or by clinical follow up over at least 9 months including microbiological and radiological findings. RESULTS: Three-phase bone scan (incl. SPECT) correctly classified 7 lesions as positive and 11 lesions as negative for osteomyelitis. Six scans were interpreted false positive, two false negative, and five as equivocal. Rating the latter as positive for osteomyelitis, sensitivity of bone scan was (78%), specificity (50%). SPECT/CT was true positive in 7 patients, and true negative in 19. There were two false positive and two false negative findings, one scan was equivocal (sensitivity 78%, specificity 86%). Definition of anatomical localization of inflammatory foci was much easier by SPECT/CT due to better depiction of underlying anatomical details. SPECT + CT/X-ray/MRI yielded the highest sensitivity (100% compared to 78% of SPECT/CT), if equivocal findings (5/31 compared to 1/31 for SPECT/CT) are rated as true positive for osteomyelitis. Among radiological techniques, MRI (2 x FP) and CT (2 x FN) proved equal and expectedly superior to X-ray in delivering the correct diagnosis. CONCLUSION: SPECT/CT improves the diagnostic performance of three-phase bone scan for osteomyelitis by avoiding false positive or equivocal results. An additional benefit over visual fusion of SPECT with X-ray, CT, or MRI studies could not be confirmed in our study.
Authors: Michael T Hirschmann; Dominic Mathis; Faik K Afifi; Helmut Rasch; Johann Henckel; Felix Amsler; Christopher R Wagner; Niklaus F Friederich; Markus P Arnold Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Michael T Hirschmann; Farhad Iranpour; Praveen Konala; Anna Kerner; Helmut Rasch; Justin P Cobb; Niklaus F Friederich Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2010-02-11 Impact factor: 4.342