Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ; 126(5): 316-23, 2006 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16547724

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Plain radiography, subtraction arthrography, nuclear arthrography, and bone scintigraphy are imaging techniques commonly used to identify aseptic femoral component loosening. Controversy exists about the relative utility of these techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy and interobserver reliability of the four techniques in 78 consecutive patients (mean age 70 years, range 29-88 years) referred for evaluation of their femoral hip prostheses. The standard evaluation protocol consisted of plain radiography followed by subtraction arthrography, nuclear arthrography, and bone scintigraphy. Surgery or the subsequent clinical course of the patient was used as gold standard. RESULTS: Overall, plain radiography had a sensitivity and specificity of 81 and 74%, respectively. Subtraction arthrography had a sensitivity of 47% and a specificity of 78%. Nuclear arthrography had a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 76%, and bone scintigraphy had a sensitivity of 88% with a specificity of 50%. CONCLUSION: We found considerable interobserver variability in all four techniques. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that bone scintigraphy and nuclear arthrography together made a significant contribution to the diagnosis when used in combination with plain radiography and are, when plain radiography is inconclusive, useful additional diagnostic techniques for the detection of femoral component loosening.


Subject(s)
Arthrography/methods , Hip Joint/diagnostic imaging , Hip Prosthesis , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Observer Variation , Radionuclide Imaging , Radiopharmaceuticals , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Technetium Tc 99m Medronate
2.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 86(11): 2456-63, 2004 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-15523018

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of a loose total hip prosthesis is often established with use of radiographic and nuclear medicine techniques, but there is controversy about the relative utility of plain radiography, subtraction arthrography, nuclear arthrography, and bone scintigraphy. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver reliability of these imaging modalities in patients suspected of having aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. METHODS: From 1994 to 1999, eighty-six consecutive patients with pain after a total hip arthroplasty were evaluated for possible loosening of the components. The imaging evaluation included plain radiography followed by a one-day protocol that included bone scintigraphy, subtraction arthrography, and nuclear arthrography. For this study, two experienced nuclear medicine physicians and two experienced radiologists, all of whom were blinded with respect to the clinical pretest data and the clinical outcome, retrospectively interpreted the diagnostic images. The sensitivity and the specificity of each imaging modality were established by comparing the findings obtained with each technique with those found at surgery or during the subsequent clinical course of the patient. Interobserver variability was determined with the intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Plain radiography had a sensitivity of 85% (95% confidence interval, 71 to 94) and a specificity of 85% (95% confidence interval, 66 to 96) in detecting aseptic loosening of the acetabular component, but it had only fair interobserver variability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.37). For subtraction arthrography, the sensitivity was 72% (95% confidence interval, 57 to 84), the specificity was 70% (95% confidence interval, 50 to 86), and there was good interobserver variability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.71). For nuclear arthrography, the sensitivity was 57% (95% confidence interval, 41 to 71), the specificity was 67% (95% confidence interval, 46 to 84), and there was fair interobserver variability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.24). For bone scintigraphy, the sensitivity was 83% (95% confidence interval, 69 to 92), the specificity was 67% (95% confidence interval, 46 to 84), and there was moderate interobserver variability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: Plain radiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. The diagnostic accuracy was increased when plain radiography was combined with bone scintigraphy or subtraction arthrography. However, we found considerable interobserver variability in image interpretation, even with experienced radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip , Hip Joint/diagnostic imaging , Prosthesis Failure , Acetabulum , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cementation , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Observer Variation , Radiography , Radionuclide Imaging , Sensitivity and Specificity , Subtraction Technique
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...