Imaging in osteomyelitis: Difference between revisions
From IDWiki
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
{| |
|||
! |
!Technique |
||
! |
!Advantages |
||
! |
!Disadvantages |
||
! |
!Sn |
||
!Sp |
|||
! Main Findings |
|||
!Main Findings |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
| |
|X-ray |
||
| |
|Inexpensive, reproducible, and accessible |
||
| |
|Late diagnosis, confusing, and radiation |
||
| |
|43 to 75% |
||
|75 to 83% |
|||
| Lytic lesions, osteopenia, periosteal thickening, loss of trabecular architecture, new bone apposition |
|||
|Lytic lesions, osteopenia, periosteal thickening, loss of trabecular architecture, new bone apposition |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
| |
|CT |
||
|Excellent spatial resolution |
|||
| Reproducible |
|||
|Cost, availability, radiation exposure |
|||
| Confusing |
|||
| |
|67% |
||
| |
|50% |
||
|Blurring of fat planes, increased density of fatty marrow, periosteal reaction, cortical erosion or destruction, and sequestra, involucra, and intraosseous gas |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
| |
|US |
||
|Accessibility, inexpensive, real-time evaluation, guided aspiration/biopsy |
|||
| Accessible |
|||
|Operator dependent, cannot image across cortical bone |
|||
| Radiation |
|||
| colspan="2" |To be determined |
|||
| |
|||
|Elevated periosteum, soft tissue abscesses and fluid collections |
|||
| |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
| |
|MRI |
||
| |
|Excellent spatial resolution, early detection, assesses extent of tissues affected |
||
|Cost, availability, time requested |
|||
| Cost |
|||
|82 to 100% |
|||
| 67%/50% (chronic) |
|||
|75 to 96% |
|||
| Blurring of fat planes |
|||
|Acute: T1 shows low-signal-intensity medullary space; T2 shows high intensity surronuding inflammatory processes and edema; Gad enhances areas of necrosis<br />Subacute: evidence of Brodie's abscess, single or multiple radiolucent abscesses; T1 shows central abscess cavity with low intensity; T2 shows high intensity of granulation tissue surrounded by low-intensity band of bone sclerosis (double-line)<br />Chronic: T1 and T2 show low-intensity areas of devascularized fibrotic scarring in the marrow |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
|Bone scan |
|||
| |
|||
|Sensitive, available, relatively cheap, early detection |
|||
| |
|||
|Nonspecific, further imaging required |
|||
| Availability |
|||
|~85% |
|||
| |
|||
|~25% |
|||
| Increased density of fatty marrow |
|||
|Focal hyperperfusion or hyperemia or bone uptake |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
|Bone+WBC scan |
|||
| |
|||
|Reliable when clearly positive or negative |
|||
| |
|||
|Need for two isotopes with multiple imaging sessions over several days, higher radiation exposure, often equivocal results, long examination time (days) |
|||
| Radiation exposure |
|||
|~60% |
|||
| |
|||
|~80% |
|||
| Periosteal reaction |
|||
|Localized area of increased uptake |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Cortical erosion or destruction |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Sequestra, involucra, intraosseous gas |
|||
|- |
|||
| US |
|||
| Accessibility, inexpensive, real-time evaluation |
|||
| Operator dependent |
|||
| To be determined |
|||
| Elevated periosteum |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| Guided aspiration-biopsy |
|||
| US beam cannot cross cortical bone |
|||
| |
|||
| Soft tissue abscess |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Fluid collection |
|||
|- |
|||
| MRI |
|||
| Excellent spatial resolution |
|||
| Cost |
|||
| 82 to 100%/75 to 96% |
|||
| Acute |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| Early detection |
|||
| Availability |
|||
| |
|||
| T1-weighted: low-signal-intensity medullary space |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| Assessment of the extent of tissue affected |
|||
| Time requested |
|||
| |
|||
| T2-weighted: high signal intensity surrounding inflammatory processes, edema |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Gadolinium: enhances areas of necrosis |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Subacute |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Evidence of Brodie's abscess, single or multiple radiolucent abscesses |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| T1-weighted: central abscess cavity with low signal intensity |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| T2-weighted: high signal intensity of granulation tissue surrounded by low-signal-intensity band of bone sclerosis (double-line effect) |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Chronic |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| T1- and T2-weighted: low-signal-intensity areas of devascularized fibrotic scarring in the marrow |
|||
|- |
|||
| Bone scan |
|||
| Sensitive |
|||
| Nonspecific |
|||
| ~85%/~25% |
|||
| Focal hyperperfusion |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| Availability |
|||
| Further imaging evaluation required |
|||
| |
|||
| Focal hyperemia |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| Relatively inexpensive |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Focal bone uptake |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| Early detection |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
|- |
|||
| Bone+WBC scan |
|||
| Reliable when clearly positive or negative |
|||
| Need for two isotopes with multiple imaging sessions over several days |
|||
| ~60%/~80% |
|||
| Localized area of increased uptake |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| High radiation exposure |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Large number of equivocal results |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
|- |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
| Long examination time |
|||
| |
|||
| |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
==Specific Indications== |
|||
== Further Reading == |
|||
*'''Post-fixation with hardware:''' WBC scan likely best, since none of the others can reliably distinguish between post-op changes and infection. |
|||
*'''Pressure ulcers:''' imaging (including MRI and WBC scan) cannot distinguish infection from bone remodeling due to pressure alone, with specificities decreasing to 15-60% range for all modalities |
|||
==Further Reading== |
|||
* Pineda C, Espinosa R, Pena A. [[10.1055/s-0029-1214160|Radiographic Imaging in Osteomyelitis: The Role of Plain Radiography, Computed Tomography, Ultrasonography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Scintigraphy]]. ''Semin Plast Surg''. 2009;23(2):080-089. |
|||
*Pineda C, Espinosa R, Pena A. [https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1214160 Radiographic Imaging in Osteomyelitis: The Role of Plain Radiography, Computed Tomography, Ultrasonography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Scintigraphy]. ''Semin Plast Surg''. 2009;23(2):080-089. |
|||
*[https://doi.org/10.1097/00006231-200608000-00006 Nuclear medicine imaging of bone infections]. ''Nuc Med Comm''. 2006;27:633–644. |
|||
[[Category:Bone and joint infections]] |
[[Category:Bone and joint infections]] |
Latest revision as of 14:12, 6 October 2022
Technique | Advantages | Disadvantages | Sn | Sp | Main Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
X-ray | Inexpensive, reproducible, and accessible | Late diagnosis, confusing, and radiation | 43 to 75% | 75 to 83% | Lytic lesions, osteopenia, periosteal thickening, loss of trabecular architecture, new bone apposition |
CT | Excellent spatial resolution | Cost, availability, radiation exposure | 67% | 50% | Blurring of fat planes, increased density of fatty marrow, periosteal reaction, cortical erosion or destruction, and sequestra, involucra, and intraosseous gas |
US | Accessibility, inexpensive, real-time evaluation, guided aspiration/biopsy | Operator dependent, cannot image across cortical bone | To be determined | Elevated periosteum, soft tissue abscesses and fluid collections | |
MRI | Excellent spatial resolution, early detection, assesses extent of tissues affected | Cost, availability, time requested | 82 to 100% | 75 to 96% | Acute: T1 shows low-signal-intensity medullary space; T2 shows high intensity surronuding inflammatory processes and edema; Gad enhances areas of necrosis Subacute: evidence of Brodie's abscess, single or multiple radiolucent abscesses; T1 shows central abscess cavity with low intensity; T2 shows high intensity of granulation tissue surrounded by low-intensity band of bone sclerosis (double-line) Chronic: T1 and T2 show low-intensity areas of devascularized fibrotic scarring in the marrow |
Bone scan | Sensitive, available, relatively cheap, early detection | Nonspecific, further imaging required | ~85% | ~25% | Focal hyperperfusion or hyperemia or bone uptake |
Bone+WBC scan | Reliable when clearly positive or negative | Need for two isotopes with multiple imaging sessions over several days, higher radiation exposure, often equivocal results, long examination time (days) | ~60% | ~80% | Localized area of increased uptake |
Specific Indications
- Post-fixation with hardware: WBC scan likely best, since none of the others can reliably distinguish between post-op changes and infection.
- Pressure ulcers: imaging (including MRI and WBC scan) cannot distinguish infection from bone remodeling due to pressure alone, with specificities decreasing to 15-60% range for all modalities
Further Reading
- Pineda C, Espinosa R, Pena A. Radiographic Imaging in Osteomyelitis: The Role of Plain Radiography, Computed Tomography, Ultrasonography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Scintigraphy. Semin Plast Surg. 2009;23(2):080-089.
- Nuclear medicine imaging of bone infections. Nuc Med Comm. 2006;27:633–644.