Literature DB >> 27275362

Correlation of Uptake Patterns on Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography (SPECT/CT) and Treatment Response in Patients with Knee Pain.

Geon Koh1, Kyung Hoon Hwang1, Haejun Lee1, Seog Gyun Kim1, Beom Koo Lee2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether treatment response in patients with knee pain could be predicted using uptake patterns on single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) images.
METHODS: Ninety-five patients with knee pain who had undergone SPECT/CT were included in this retrospective study. Subjects were divided into three groups: increased focal uptake (FTU), increased irregular tracer uptake (ITU), and no tracer uptake (NTU). A numeric rating scale (NRS-11) assessed pain intensity. We analyzed the association between uptake patterns and treatment response using Pearson's chi-square test and Fisher's exact test. Uptake was quantified from SPECT/CT with region of interest (ROI) counting, and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) calculated agreement. We used Student's t-test to calculate statistically significant differences of counts between groups and the Pearson correlation to measure the relationship between counts and initial NRS-1k1. Multivariate logistic regression analysis determined which variables were significantly associated with uptake.
RESULTS: The FTU group included 32 patients; ITU, 39; and NTU, 24. With conservative management, 64 % of patients with increased tracer uptake (TU, both focal and irregular) and 36 % with NTU showed positive response. Conservative treatment response of FTU was better than NTU, but did not differ from that of ITU. Conservative treatment response of TU was significantly different from that of NTU (OR 3.1; p = 0.036). Moderate positive correlation was observed between ITU and initial NRS-11. Age and initial NRS-11 significantly predicted uptake.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with uptake in their knee(s) on SPECT/CT showed positive treatment response under conservative treatment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Knee; Pain; Response; SPECT; Uptake

Year:  2015        PMID: 27275362      PMCID: PMC4870462          DOI: 10.1007/s13139-015-0381-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1869-3474


  23 in total

1.  The numeric rating scale for clinical pain measurement: a ratio measure?

Authors:  Craig T Hartrick; Juliann P Kovan; Sharon Shapiro
Journal:  Pain Pract       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.183

Review 2.  Single-photon emission computed tomography combined with computed tomography (SPECT/CT) in bone diseases.

Authors:  Dimitri Papathanassiou; Claire Bruna-Muraille; Christelle Jouannaud; Laurence Gagneux-Lemoussu; Jean-Paul Eschard; Jean-Claude Liehn
Journal:  Joint Bone Spine       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 4.929

3.  A review of the literature on multiple factors involved in postoperative pain course and duration.

Authors:  Oscar de Leon-Casasola
Journal:  Postgrad Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Determination of clinically meaningful levels of pain reduction in patients experiencing acute postoperative pain.

Authors:  Rod Sloman; Anna Woloski Wruble; Gila Rosen; Miriam Rom
Journal:  Pain Manag Nurs       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 1.929

Review 5.  Evaluation of patients presenting with knee pain: Part II. Differential diagnosis.

Authors:  Walter L Calmbach; Mark Hutchens
Journal:  Am Fam Physician       Date:  2003-09-01       Impact factor: 3.292

Review 6.  Evaluation of patients presenting with knee pain: Part I. History, physical examination, radiographs, and laboratory tests.

Authors:  Walter L Calmbach; Mark Hutchens
Journal:  Am Fam Physician       Date:  2003-09-01       Impact factor: 3.292

7.  FDG PET uptake as a predictor of pain response in palliative radiation therapy in patients with bone metastasis.

Authors:  Mustafa Adli; Abdurrahman Kuzhan; Hilal Alkis; Fundagul Andic; Mustafa Yilmaz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Determining mild, moderate, and severe pain equivalency across pain-intensity tools in nursing home residents.

Authors:  Katherine R Jones; Carol P Vojir; Evelyn Hutt; Regina Fink
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2007

9.  Hybrid SPECT-CT for characterizing isolated vertebral lesions observed by bone scintigraphy: comparison with planar scintigraphy, SPECT, and CT.

Authors:  Punit Sharma; Varun Singh Dhull; Rama Mohan Reddy; Chandrasekhar Bal; Sanjay Thulkar; Arun Malhotra; Rakesh Kumar
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2012-08-03       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 10.  Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP).

Authors:  Gillian A Hawker; Samra Mian; Tetyana Kendzerska; Melissa French
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 4.794

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  KSNM 60 in General Nuclear Medicine: the Old Dream Comes True.

Authors:  Won Woo Lee; Jin-Sook Ryu
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-01-28

2.  Influence of the anterior notch in mobile-bearing UKA on patellofemoral radiotracer uptake and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Dietmar Dammerer; Michael Liebensteiner; Hannes Rochau; Christian Uprimny; Vinzenz Smekal; Ralf Rosenberger; Elvire Servien
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 2.362

3.  The Value of SPECT/CT for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  D Zarringam; D B F Saris; J E J Bekkers
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2019-06-16       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  SPECT/CT imaging of chemotherapy-induced tumor apoptosis using 99mTc-labeled dendrimer-entrapped gold nanoparticles.

Authors:  Yan Xing; Jingyi Zhu; Lingzhou Zhao; Zhijuan Xiong; Yujie Li; San Wu; Gitasha Chand; Xiangyang Shi; Jinhua Zhao
Journal:  Drug Deliv       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 6.419

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.