Comparative Analysis of 99mTc-MDP Three-Phase Bone Scan with SPECT/CT and 99mTc-HMPAO-Labeled WBC SPECT/CT in the Differential Diagnosis of Clinically Suspicious Post-traumatic Osteomyelitis

Purpose To identify differences between three-phase bone scan and SPECT/CT (TBS) and WBC SPECT/CT (WS) and compare diagnostic accuracies of each modality in patients with suspicious post-traumatic osteomyelitis (OM). Methods Twenty-one patients with suspicious post-traumatic OM were enrolled. All pa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 2017, 51(1), , pp.40-48
Main Authors: Kim, Chanwoo, Lee, Soo Jin, Kim, Ji Young, Hwang, Kyu Tae, Choi, Yun Young
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Biocompatibility
Cardiology
Computed tomography
Diagnosis
Diagnostic systems
Imaging
Inflammation
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Nuclear Medicine
Oncology
Original
Original Article
Orthopedics
Patients
Radiology
Sensitivity
Technetium isotopes
방사선과학
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose To identify differences between three-phase bone scan and SPECT/CT (TBS) and WBC SPECT/CT (WS) and compare diagnostic accuracies of each modality in patients with suspicious post-traumatic osteomyelitis (OM). Methods Twenty-one patients with suspicious post-traumatic OM were enrolled. All patients performed TBS and WS within 1 week. Foci of MDP and WBC accumulation were divided into three categories: bone (OM), soft tissue (soft tissue inflammation; STI), negative for inflammation (NI). Confirmative diagnosis was made upon operative pathology or long-term clinical follow-up. Results Of 21 patients, four OM, eight STI, nine NI were finally diagnosed. TBS diagnosis was correct in three of four positive cases and nine of 17 negative cases. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of TBS were 75 %, 52.9 %, 57.1 %, 27.3 %, 90 %. WS diagnosis was correct in two of four positive cases and 17 of 17 negative cases. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV were 50 %, 100 %, 81.0 %, 100 %, 89.5 %. Twelve of 21 cases showed agreement between TBS and WS. TBS misdiagnosed nine cases (six STI and two NI as eight OM; one OM as one STI), while WS misdiagnosed four cases (two OM as two STI; two STI as two NI). Combining results from TBS and WS led to better diagnostic accuracy (91.7 %) than either TBS or WS alone. Conclusion TBS and WS showed moderate agreement in assessment of clinically suspected post-traumatic OM. WS better evaluated inflammation than TBS. WS tended to underestimate inflammation whereas TBS tended to overestimate inflammation. Combining TBS and WS enhanced diagnostic accuracy.
ISSN:1869-3474
1869-3482
DOI:10.1007/s13139-016-0441-x