Cargando…

Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis

INTRODUCTION: : Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging using gadolinium contrast media is an essential imaging modality in diagnosing spondylitis. However, gadolinium contrast is not widely available in Indonesia and relatively expensive. Many MR studies in Indonesia are performed without contrast administ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prasetyo, Marcel, Sirath, Aldi Semanta, Wicaksono, Krishna Pandu, Prihartono, Joedo, Setiawan, Stefanus Imanuel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7733015/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33335952
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100306
_version_ 1783622199227187200
author Prasetyo, Marcel
Sirath, Aldi Semanta
Wicaksono, Krishna Pandu
Prihartono, Joedo
Setiawan, Stefanus Imanuel
author_facet Prasetyo, Marcel
Sirath, Aldi Semanta
Wicaksono, Krishna Pandu
Prihartono, Joedo
Setiawan, Stefanus Imanuel
author_sort Prasetyo, Marcel
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: : Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging using gadolinium contrast media is an essential imaging modality in diagnosing spondylitis. However, gadolinium contrast is not widely available in Indonesia and relatively expensive. Many MR studies in Indonesia are performed without contrast administration. It is unclear how confident non-contrast MR can diagnose tuberculous spondylitis in comparison to standard contrast MR. PURPOSES: : This study aims to evaluate the concordance between the contrast MR and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. We also evaluate the interobserver agreement between the general radiologist and musculoskeletal radiologist in interpreting non-contrast MR of spondylitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: : A cross-sectional study using secondary data was performed to evaluate the concordance between the MR results regarding the usage of contrast media in diagnosing spondylitis. The inclusion criteria were patients over 17 years old who underwent complete sequences of contrast-enhanced MR examination of the spine, referred to radiology with the clinical diagnosis of suspected tuberculous spondylitis, spondylodiscitis, or both. All of the non-contrast and contrast-enhanced MR results were read and interpreted by two independent observers, a musculoskeletal radiologist and a general radiologist, blindly. The interobserver agreement analysis of the MR examination was conducted using Kappa and McNemar test. RESULTS: : There was no significant difference between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing spondylitis (P= 0.368) and no significant difference in the interpretation of MR between the first and the second observer (P =  0.343). The concordance between the contrast and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing spondylitis (R: 0.88, P < 0.001) and the interpretation of MR between both observers (R: 0.65, P < 0.001) were showed in this study. CONCLUSION: : There is a high concordance between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. Although contrast MR is preferred as the standard imaging method of spondylitis, in case gadolinium contrast is unavailable, non-contrast MR can still provide valuable information in diagnosing spondylitis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7733015
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77330152020-12-16 Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis Prasetyo, Marcel Sirath, Aldi Semanta Wicaksono, Krishna Pandu Prihartono, Joedo Setiawan, Stefanus Imanuel Eur J Radiol Open Article INTRODUCTION: : Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging using gadolinium contrast media is an essential imaging modality in diagnosing spondylitis. However, gadolinium contrast is not widely available in Indonesia and relatively expensive. Many MR studies in Indonesia are performed without contrast administration. It is unclear how confident non-contrast MR can diagnose tuberculous spondylitis in comparison to standard contrast MR. PURPOSES: : This study aims to evaluate the concordance between the contrast MR and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. We also evaluate the interobserver agreement between the general radiologist and musculoskeletal radiologist in interpreting non-contrast MR of spondylitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: : A cross-sectional study using secondary data was performed to evaluate the concordance between the MR results regarding the usage of contrast media in diagnosing spondylitis. The inclusion criteria were patients over 17 years old who underwent complete sequences of contrast-enhanced MR examination of the spine, referred to radiology with the clinical diagnosis of suspected tuberculous spondylitis, spondylodiscitis, or both. All of the non-contrast and contrast-enhanced MR results were read and interpreted by two independent observers, a musculoskeletal radiologist and a general radiologist, blindly. The interobserver agreement analysis of the MR examination was conducted using Kappa and McNemar test. RESULTS: : There was no significant difference between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing spondylitis (P= 0.368) and no significant difference in the interpretation of MR between the first and the second observer (P =  0.343). The concordance between the contrast and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing spondylitis (R: 0.88, P < 0.001) and the interpretation of MR between both observers (R: 0.65, P < 0.001) were showed in this study. CONCLUSION: : There is a high concordance between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. Although contrast MR is preferred as the standard imaging method of spondylitis, in case gadolinium contrast is unavailable, non-contrast MR can still provide valuable information in diagnosing spondylitis. Elsevier 2020-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7733015/ /pubmed/33335952 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100306 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Prasetyo, Marcel
Sirath, Aldi Semanta
Wicaksono, Krishna Pandu
Prihartono, Joedo
Setiawan, Stefanus Imanuel
Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis
title Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis
title_full Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis
title_fullStr Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis
title_short Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis: A quantitative concordance-analysis
title_sort non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced mr in the diagnosis of spondylitis: a quantitative concordance-analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7733015/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33335952
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100306
work_keys_str_mv AT prasetyomarcel noncontrastversuscontrastenhancedmrinthediagnosisofspondylitisaquantitativeconcordanceanalysis
AT sirathaldisemanta noncontrastversuscontrastenhancedmrinthediagnosisofspondylitisaquantitativeconcordanceanalysis
AT wicaksonokrishnapandu noncontrastversuscontrastenhancedmrinthediagnosisofspondylitisaquantitativeconcordanceanalysis
AT prihartonojoedo noncontrastversuscontrastenhancedmrinthediagnosisofspondylitisaquantitativeconcordanceanalysis
AT setiawanstefanusimanuel noncontrastversuscontrastenhancedmrinthediagnosisofspondylitisaquantitativeconcordanceanalysis