Reliability of Microwave Radiometry for the Assessment of Charcot Foot.

Ioanna Eleftheriadou, Anastasios Tentolouris, Ourania Kosta, Paraskevi Kontrafouri, Maria Tektonidou, Petros P Sfikakis, Nikolaos Tentolouris
{"title":"Reliability of Microwave Radiometry for the Assessment of Charcot Foot.","authors":"Ioanna Eleftheriadou, Anastasios Tentolouris, Ourania Kosta, Paraskevi Kontrafouri, Maria Tektonidou, Petros P Sfikakis, Nikolaos Tentolouris","doi":"10.1177/15347346251329733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Applying infrared thermometry for temperature measurement is recommended for Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CNO) diagnosis and monitoring of its course. Microwave radiometry (MWR) is used for the detection of temperature changes in human tissues. This study evaluates the agreement between these two methods in CNO assessment. Individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM) with and without active CNO were included. MWR measurements were performed by a microwave computer-based system that detects microwave radiation from the area under investigation and temperatures of the internal tissues. Sensors with diameters of 0.8 cm (MWR 0.8), 2 cm (MWR 2), and 5 cm (MWR 5) were used, with larger diameters enabling deeper tissue assessment. Nine individuals (mean age: 54.6 ± 15.7, 2 females) with active CNO and 5 people with DM without CNO were included in the study. The agreement between temperatures measured by infrared thermometry and by MWR 0.8 was high and the average temperature discrepancy between the two methods was 0.034 °C (<i>P</i> = .676). The average temperature discrepancy between infrared thermometry and MWR 2 was -0.323 °C (<i>P</i> < .001) and between infrared thermometry and MWR 5 was -0.315 °C (<i>P</i> = .002). Participants with active CNO were followed-up for a median period of 67 [39, 79] weeks. During follow up, the difference in skin temperature between the affected and the contralateral foot was lower than 2 °C in 7 (77.8%) participants. Three out of 5 individuals had re-activation of CNO in 21, 22 and 65 weeks after the removal of the offloading device, respectively. The decision to gradually start loading would be different only for one person if we had used MWR instead of infrared thermometry for the measurement of temperature difference between the affected and the contralateral foot. In conclusion, infrared thermometry showed high agreement with MWR 0.8 but not with MWR 2 or MWR 5.</p>","PeriodicalId":94229,"journal":{"name":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","volume":" ","pages":"15347346251329733"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15347346251329733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Applying infrared thermometry for temperature measurement is recommended for Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CNO) diagnosis and monitoring of its course. Microwave radiometry (MWR) is used for the detection of temperature changes in human tissues. This study evaluates the agreement between these two methods in CNO assessment. Individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM) with and without active CNO were included. MWR measurements were performed by a microwave computer-based system that detects microwave radiation from the area under investigation and temperatures of the internal tissues. Sensors with diameters of 0.8 cm (MWR 0.8), 2 cm (MWR 2), and 5 cm (MWR 5) were used, with larger diameters enabling deeper tissue assessment. Nine individuals (mean age: 54.6 ± 15.7, 2 females) with active CNO and 5 people with DM without CNO were included in the study. The agreement between temperatures measured by infrared thermometry and by MWR 0.8 was high and the average temperature discrepancy between the two methods was 0.034 °C (P = .676). The average temperature discrepancy between infrared thermometry and MWR 2 was -0.323 °C (P < .001) and between infrared thermometry and MWR 5 was -0.315 °C (P = .002). Participants with active CNO were followed-up for a median period of 67 [39, 79] weeks. During follow up, the difference in skin temperature between the affected and the contralateral foot was lower than 2 °C in 7 (77.8%) participants. Three out of 5 individuals had re-activation of CNO in 21, 22 and 65 weeks after the removal of the offloading device, respectively. The decision to gradually start loading would be different only for one person if we had used MWR instead of infrared thermometry for the measurement of temperature difference between the affected and the contralateral foot. In conclusion, infrared thermometry showed high agreement with MWR 0.8 but not with MWR 2 or MWR 5.

微波辐射测量法评定夏科足的可靠性。
应用红外测温仪测量温度被推荐用于Charcot神经骨关节病(CNO)的诊断和病程监测。微波辐射测量法(MWR)用于检测人体组织的温度变化。本研究评估两种方法在CNO评估中的一致性。包括伴有或不伴有活性CNO的糖尿病患者。MWR的测量是由一个基于微波计算机的系统来完成的,该系统可以检测来自被调查区域的微波辐射和内部组织的温度。使用直径为0.8 cm (MWR 0.8)、2 cm (MWR 2)和5 cm (MWR 5)的传感器,直径较大的传感器可以进行更深层次的组织评估。9例CNO活跃患者(平均年龄54.6±15.7岁,女性2例)和5例无CNO的DM患者纳入研究。红外测温法测得的温度与MWR 0.8法测得的温度吻合度较高,两种方法测得的平均温度差为0.034℃(P = 0.676)。红外测温与MWR 2的平均温度差为-0.323°C (P P = 0.002)。CNO活跃的参与者随访时间中位数为67周[39,79]。在随访期间,7名(77.8%)参与者患足与对侧足的皮肤温度差异低于2°C。5人中有3人分别在卸除装置后21、22和65周再次激活CNO。如果我们使用MWR而不是红外测温仪来测量受影响的脚和对侧脚之间的温差,那么逐渐开始加载的决定只会对一个人有所不同。综上所述,红外测温与MWR 0.8的一致性较高,而与MWR 2和MWR 5的一致性较差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信