{"title":"与单独CT相比,MRI改变胸腰椎骨折的骨折分类或决策的频率有多高?","authors":"M. Ali","doi":"10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9797","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: This study aimed at analyzing the frequency and predictor of the change in classification of TLFs after performing MRI compared with CT alone. \nMethodology: This retrospective review included 235 consecutive patients with acute TLFs (T1-L5) who presented at a single level-1 trauma center between 2014 and 2021 and underwent both CT and MRI. Patients with translation injury, neurologic deficit, or osteoporotic fracture were excluded. Three reviewers independently classified all fractures according to AOSpine and Thoracolumbar Injury classification (TLISS) by CT and then MRI. A fourth reviewer only looked at the MRI images. Posterior ligamentous complex Injury was diagnosed on CT and MRI by two positive CT findings and black stripe discontinuity. Mc-Nemar test was used to evaluate the difference in the proportions of AO type A and B. \nResult: The AO classification by CT was type A in 181 patients (77%) and type B in 54 patients (23%). The addition of MRI after CT changed AO classification in 25/235 patients (10.6%, P < 0.0001) due to an 8.5% (20/235) upgrade from type A to type B and 2.1% (5/235) downgrade from type B to type A. When PLC injury in CT was defined by one positive CT finding and in MRI by high signal intensity, it significantly increased the rate of fracture reclassification by MRI compared to default analysis (22% and 33% vs 11%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The best predictor of upgrade from type A to type B and downgrade from type B to type A was a single positive CT finding, and the presence of only two CT signs as opposed to three signs, respectively (reclassification rate 26% vs 4.6%, P < 0.0001 and 17% vs 0%, P = 0.03, respectively). Thoracic and thoracolumbar fractures showed a significantly higher reclassification rate than low lumbar (20% and 10% vs 0%, respectively, P = 0.07). \nConclusion: Using appropriate CT/MRI criteria of PLC injury, the rate of fracture reclassification by MRI can be as low as 10%. The use of alternative CT/MRI criteria or inaccurate image interpretation could significantly increase the rate of fracture reclassification up to 20–30%. The rate of change of fracture classification by MRI could be predicted by the number of positive CT findings on CT or fracture level.","PeriodicalId":199836,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Often MRI Would Change the Fracture Classification or Decision-making in Thoracolumbar Fractures Compared to CT Alone?\",\"authors\":\"M. Ali\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9797\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: This study aimed at analyzing the frequency and predictor of the change in classification of TLFs after performing MRI compared with CT alone. \\nMethodology: This retrospective review included 235 consecutive patients with acute TLFs (T1-L5) who presented at a single level-1 trauma center between 2014 and 2021 and underwent both CT and MRI. Patients with translation injury, neurologic deficit, or osteoporotic fracture were excluded. Three reviewers independently classified all fractures according to AOSpine and Thoracolumbar Injury classification (TLISS) by CT and then MRI. A fourth reviewer only looked at the MRI images. Posterior ligamentous complex Injury was diagnosed on CT and MRI by two positive CT findings and black stripe discontinuity. Mc-Nemar test was used to evaluate the difference in the proportions of AO type A and B. \\nResult: The AO classification by CT was type A in 181 patients (77%) and type B in 54 patients (23%). The addition of MRI after CT changed AO classification in 25/235 patients (10.6%, P < 0.0001) due to an 8.5% (20/235) upgrade from type A to type B and 2.1% (5/235) downgrade from type B to type A. When PLC injury in CT was defined by one positive CT finding and in MRI by high signal intensity, it significantly increased the rate of fracture reclassification by MRI compared to default analysis (22% and 33% vs 11%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The best predictor of upgrade from type A to type B and downgrade from type B to type A was a single positive CT finding, and the presence of only two CT signs as opposed to three signs, respectively (reclassification rate 26% vs 4.6%, P < 0.0001 and 17% vs 0%, P = 0.03, respectively). Thoracic and thoracolumbar fractures showed a significantly higher reclassification rate than low lumbar (20% and 10% vs 0%, respectively, P = 0.07). \\nConclusion: Using appropriate CT/MRI criteria of PLC injury, the rate of fracture reclassification by MRI can be as low as 10%. The use of alternative CT/MRI criteria or inaccurate image interpretation could significantly increase the rate of fracture reclassification up to 20–30%. The rate of change of fracture classification by MRI could be predicted by the number of positive CT findings on CT or fracture level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":199836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9797\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9797","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介:本研究旨在分析MRI与CT单独比较后tlf分类变化的频率和预测因素。方法:本回顾性研究纳入了235例急性tlf (T1-L5)患者,这些患者于2014年至2021年间在同一家一级创伤中心就诊,并接受了CT和MRI检查。排除平移损伤、神经功能缺损或骨质疏松性骨折的患者。三位审稿人根据AOSpine and thoracic腰椎Injury classification (TLISS)分别用CT和MRI对所有骨折进行分类。第四名评论者只看了核磁共振图像。后韧带复合体损伤在CT和MRI上被诊断为两个阳性CT表现和黑色条纹间断。采用Mc-Nemar试验评价A型AO与B型AO的比例差异。结果:CT诊断AO为A型181例(77%),B型54例(23%)。CT后增加的MRI改变了25/235例患者的AO分类(10.6%,P < 0.0001),因为从A型到B型的升级率为8.5%(20/235),从B型到A型的降级率为2.1%(5/235)。当CT中的PLC损伤通过一次CT阳性发现来定义,MRI中通过高信号强度来定义时,与默认分析相比,MRI的骨折重新分类率显著增加(分别为22%和33%);P < 0.0001)。从A型升级为B型和从B型降级为A型的最佳预测指标是单一的CT阳性发现,仅存在两个CT征象而不是三个征象(重新分类率分别为26%对4.6%,P < 0.0001和17%对0%,P = 0.03)。胸椎和胸腰椎骨折的再分类率明显高于腰椎(分别为20%和10% vs 0%, P = 0.07)。结论:采用合适的PLC损伤CT/MRI诊断标准,MRI骨折再分型率可低至10%。使用替代的CT/MRI标准或不准确的图像解释可显著提高骨折再分类率,最高可达20-30%。MRI骨折分型的变化率可以通过CT阳性表现数或骨折程度来预测。
How Often MRI Would Change the Fracture Classification or Decision-making in Thoracolumbar Fractures Compared to CT Alone?
Introduction: This study aimed at analyzing the frequency and predictor of the change in classification of TLFs after performing MRI compared with CT alone.
Methodology: This retrospective review included 235 consecutive patients with acute TLFs (T1-L5) who presented at a single level-1 trauma center between 2014 and 2021 and underwent both CT and MRI. Patients with translation injury, neurologic deficit, or osteoporotic fracture were excluded. Three reviewers independently classified all fractures according to AOSpine and Thoracolumbar Injury classification (TLISS) by CT and then MRI. A fourth reviewer only looked at the MRI images. Posterior ligamentous complex Injury was diagnosed on CT and MRI by two positive CT findings and black stripe discontinuity. Mc-Nemar test was used to evaluate the difference in the proportions of AO type A and B.
Result: The AO classification by CT was type A in 181 patients (77%) and type B in 54 patients (23%). The addition of MRI after CT changed AO classification in 25/235 patients (10.6%, P < 0.0001) due to an 8.5% (20/235) upgrade from type A to type B and 2.1% (5/235) downgrade from type B to type A. When PLC injury in CT was defined by one positive CT finding and in MRI by high signal intensity, it significantly increased the rate of fracture reclassification by MRI compared to default analysis (22% and 33% vs 11%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The best predictor of upgrade from type A to type B and downgrade from type B to type A was a single positive CT finding, and the presence of only two CT signs as opposed to three signs, respectively (reclassification rate 26% vs 4.6%, P < 0.0001 and 17% vs 0%, P = 0.03, respectively). Thoracic and thoracolumbar fractures showed a significantly higher reclassification rate than low lumbar (20% and 10% vs 0%, respectively, P = 0.07).
Conclusion: Using appropriate CT/MRI criteria of PLC injury, the rate of fracture reclassification by MRI can be as low as 10%. The use of alternative CT/MRI criteria or inaccurate image interpretation could significantly increase the rate of fracture reclassification up to 20–30%. The rate of change of fracture classification by MRI could be predicted by the number of positive CT findings on CT or fracture level.