| Literature DB >> 25668182 |
Seunggyun Ha1, Sung Hwan Hong2, Jin Chul Paeng1, Dong Yeon Lee3, Gi Jeong Cheon1, Amitabh Arya4, June-Key Chung1, Dong Soo Lee1, Keon Wook Kang1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of SPECT/CT and MRI in patients with ankle and foot pain, with regard to the lesion types.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25668182 PMCID: PMC4323343 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117583
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Images of representative cases.
(A) Axial MRI (left) of a19-year-old woman revealed an osteochondral lesion in the right medial talar dome area. SPECT/CT (middle and right) also exhibited focal intense uptake in the same area, concordant with MRI. The lesion was diagnosed with symptomatic osteochondral lesion of talus, and her ankle pain improved after arthroscopic multiple drilling of the talus. (B) Sagittal fat-saturated MRI (left) of a 65-year-old woman with posterior heel pain revealed an osteochondral lesion in the right medial talar dome area, whereas SPECT/CT showed no abnormal uptake in the same area. The pain improved after surgical removal of a right calcaneal bony fragment, and the talar dome lesion was determined to be asymptomatic.
Fig 2Representative images of lesion types.
CT-axial (left), SPECT-axial (middle), and fusion-axial (right) images of SPECT/CT are shown; a bone lesion (contusion) involving the medial malleolus (A), a joint lesion (arthritis) involving the left talocrural joint (B), and a ligament/tendon lesion (tendinitis) involving the Achilles tendon insertion site of calcaneus (C).
Final diagnosis for symptomatic lesions.
| Lesion type | Final diagnosis | Surgically diagnosed | Clinically diagnosed: pain site | Sum | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ankle | Forefoot | Midfoot | Hindfoot | ||||
| Bone | Osteochondral lesion of talus | 19 | 11 | 30 | |||
| Bony fragment or accessory bone | 3 | 1 | 4 | ||||
| Bone contusion and secondary change | 2 | 2 | |||||
| Fracture | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Ligament/tendon | Sprain | 1 | 8 | 1 | 10 | ||
| Achilles tendinitis | 3 | 1 | 4 | ||||
| Joint | Osteoarthritis | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||
| Systemic inflammatory arthritis | 3 | 3 | |||||
| Arthritis, others | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | |||
| Total | 27 | 25 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 61 | |
Uptake grade on SPECT/CT.
| Uptake grade |
| |
|---|---|---|
| Correlation with symptoms | ||
|
| 2.4 ± 0.8 | < 0.001 |
|
| 1.5 ± 0.7 | |
| Lesion type | ||
|
| 2.3 ± 0.8 | 0.002 |
|
| 1.6 ± 0.9 | |
|
| 1.8 ± 0.8 | |
Fig 3ROC curve analysis of uptake grade for diagnosing symptomatic lesions.
The area under curve was 0.787, and the optimal cutoff was grade 3 with 60% sensitivity and 91% specificity.
Number of lesions detected on each imaging method according to lesion type.
| Bone | Ligament/tendon | Joint | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPECT/CT | ||||
|
| 37 | 10 | 10 | 57 |
|
| 9 | 11 | 25 | 45 |
| MRI | ||||
|
| 37 | 14 | 9 | 60 |
|
| 19 | 37 | 9 | 65 |
†11 lesions were additionally detected by combined CT only, with grade 0 uptake
Diagnostic performance of SPECT/CT and MRI for symptomatic lesions in each lesion type.
| Bone (N = 58) | Ligament/tendon (N = 54) | Joint (N = 35) | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPECT/CT | ||||
| Sensitivity | 100% | 71% | 100% | 93% |
| (37/37) | (10/14) | (10/10) | (57/61) | |
| Specificity | 57% | 73% | 0% | 48% |
| (12/21) | (29/40) | (0/25) | (41/86) | |
| PPV | 80% | 48% | 29% | 56% |
| (37/46) | (10/21) | (10/35) | (57/102) | |
| NPV | 100% | 88% | N/A | 91% |
| (12/12) | (29/33) | (41/45) | ||
| MRI | ||||
| Sensitivity | 100% | 100% | 90% | 98% |
| (37/37) | (14/14) | (9/10) | (60/61) | |
| Specificity | 10% | 8% | 64% | 24% |
| (2/21) | (3/40) | (16/25) | (21/86) | |
| PPV | 66% | 27% | 50% | 48% |
| (37/56) | (14/51) | (9/18) | (60/125) | |
| NPV | 100% | 100% | 94% | 95% |
| (2/2) | (3/3) | (16/17) | (21/22) |
PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, N/A not applicable