Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha1, Ahmad Abdel Azim Ismail2, Ahmed Hatem F Imam3. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt. drmohammad_basha@yahoo.com. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic role of radiography and multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) in acute traumatic wrist injuries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-eight patients with acute wrist trauma were enrolled in our study. All patients had submitted to radiography and MDCT within 24 h after wrist trauma. The diagnostic role of radiography and MDCT was evaluated and compared. The effective radiation dose of the two techniques was calculated. RESULTS: One hundred four (61.9%) and 84 (50%) out of 168 patients had acute wrist injuries on MDCT and radiographic examinations, respectively. Using MDCT results as a reference standard, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of radiography in the diagnosis of distal radius fracture were 85.7, 96, and 92.3%, respectively, and in the diagnosis of scaphoid fracture were 62.5, 97.3, and 88.5%, respectively. As regards detection of acute traumatic wrist injuries, we observed no significant difference between the two modalities (P = 0.1347); in addition, both modalities had high consistency (κ = 0.8359). The mean effective radiation dose of radiography was 0.01 mSv and of MDCT was 0.1 mSv. CONCLUSION: Radiography still remains as the first screening tool in acute traumatic wrist injuries and MDCT is complementary to it and used as a problem-solving tool or for preoperative planning.
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic role of radiography and multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) in acute traumatic wrist injuries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-eight patients with acute wrist trauma were enrolled in our study. All patients had submitted to radiography and MDCT within 24 h after wrist trauma. The diagnostic role of radiography and MDCT was evaluated and compared. The effective radiation dose of the two techniques was calculated. RESULTS: One hundred four (61.9%) and 84 (50%) out of 168 patients had acute wrist injuries on MDCT and radiographic examinations, respectively. Using MDCT results as a reference standard, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of radiography in the diagnosis of distal radius fracture were 85.7, 96, and 92.3%, respectively, and in the diagnosis of scaphoid fracture were 62.5, 97.3, and 88.5%, respectively. As regards detection of acute traumatic wrist injuries, we observed no significant difference between the two modalities (P = 0.1347); in addition, both modalities had high consistency (κ = 0.8359). The mean effective radiation dose of radiography was 0.01 mSv and of MDCT was 0.1 mSv. CONCLUSION: Radiography still remains as the first screening tool in acute traumatic wrist injuries and MDCT is complementary to it and used as a problem-solving tool or for preoperative planning.
Authors: J Rydberg; K A Buckwalter; K S Caldemeyer; M D Phillips; D J Conces; A M Aisen; S A Persohn; K K Kopecky Journal: Radiographics Date: 2000 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Cyrus Behzadi; Murat Karul; Frank Oliver Henes; Azien Laqmani; Philipp Catala-Lehnen; Wolfgang Lehmann; Hans-Dieter Nagel; Gerhard Adam; Marc Regier Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2015-01-28
Authors: Abu Mohammed Raisuddin; Elias Vaattovaara; Mika Nevalainen; Marko Nikki; Elina Järvenpää; Kaisa Makkonen; Pekka Pinola; Tuula Palsio; Arttu Niemensivu; Osmo Tervonen; Aleksei Tiulpin Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 4.379