SPECT骨显像与MRI诊断半月板撕裂的比较。

BMC nuclear medicine Pub Date : 2005-04-14 eCollection Date: 2005-01-01 DOI:10.1186/1471-2385-5-2
Mohammad-Naghi Tahmasebi, Mohsen Saghari, Masoud Moslehi, Ali Gholamrezanezhad
{"title":"SPECT骨显像与MRI诊断半月板撕裂的比较。","authors":"Mohammad-Naghi Tahmasebi,&nbsp;Mohsen Saghari,&nbsp;Masoud Moslehi,&nbsp;Ali Gholamrezanezhad","doi":"10.1186/1471-2385-5-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Scintigraphy has been considered as competitive to MRI, but limited data are available on the accuracy of single photon emission tomography (SPECT) compared with MRI for the assessment of meniscal tears. Our objective was to assess the value of SPECT in comparison to MRI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between January 2003 and March 2004, sixteen patients were studied with both modalities and the accuracy rates of SPECT scan results, and MRI findings in the diagnosis of meniscal tears were compared. Arthroscopy was the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The respective sensitivity rate, specificity rate, and positive and negative predictive accuracies of MRI were 89%, 94%, 93%, and 79% and for SPECT those were 78%, 94%, 94%, and 88%. There was good agreement on the presence or absence of tears between two modalities (κ statistic = 0.699).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPECT and MRI are both valuable imaging techniques. SPECT is a useful alternative when MRI is unavailable or unsuitable and it is beneficial when more possible accuracy is desired (such as when MRI results are either inconclusive or conflict with other clinical data).</p>","PeriodicalId":80684,"journal":{"name":"BMC nuclear medicine","volume":"5 ","pages":"2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1471-2385-5-2","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of SPECT bone scintigraphy with MRI for diagnosis of meniscal tears.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad-Naghi Tahmasebi,&nbsp;Mohsen Saghari,&nbsp;Masoud Moslehi,&nbsp;Ali Gholamrezanezhad\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1471-2385-5-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Scintigraphy has been considered as competitive to MRI, but limited data are available on the accuracy of single photon emission tomography (SPECT) compared with MRI for the assessment of meniscal tears. Our objective was to assess the value of SPECT in comparison to MRI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between January 2003 and March 2004, sixteen patients were studied with both modalities and the accuracy rates of SPECT scan results, and MRI findings in the diagnosis of meniscal tears were compared. Arthroscopy was the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The respective sensitivity rate, specificity rate, and positive and negative predictive accuracies of MRI were 89%, 94%, 93%, and 79% and for SPECT those were 78%, 94%, 94%, and 88%. There was good agreement on the presence or absence of tears between two modalities (κ statistic = 0.699).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SPECT and MRI are both valuable imaging techniques. SPECT is a useful alternative when MRI is unavailable or unsuitable and it is beneficial when more possible accuracy is desired (such as when MRI results are either inconclusive or conflict with other clinical data).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC nuclear medicine\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1471-2385-5-2\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC nuclear medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2385-5-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2005/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC nuclear medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2385-5-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2005/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

背景:闪烁成像被认为是与MRI相竞争的技术,但是单光子发射断层扫描(SPECT)与MRI在评估半月板撕裂的准确性方面的数据有限。我们的目的是评估SPECT与MRI相比的价值。方法:对2003年1月~ 2004年3月间16例半月板撕裂的患者进行两种扫描方式及SPECT扫描结果的正确率的比较,并与MRI检查结果进行比较。关节镜检查是金标准。结果:MRI的敏感性、特异性和阳性、阴性预测准确率分别为89%、94%、93%和79%,SPECT的敏感性、特异性和阴性预测准确率分别为78%、94%、94%和88%。两种模式之间存在或不存在撕裂的一致性很好(κ统计量= 0.699)。结论:SPECT和MRI都是有价值的成像技术。当MRI不可用或不合适时,SPECT是一种有用的替代方法,当需要更多可能的准确性时(例如MRI结果不确定或与其他临床数据冲突时),SPECT是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of SPECT bone scintigraphy with MRI for diagnosis of meniscal tears.

Comparison of SPECT bone scintigraphy with MRI for diagnosis of meniscal tears.

Comparison of SPECT bone scintigraphy with MRI for diagnosis of meniscal tears.

Background: Scintigraphy has been considered as competitive to MRI, but limited data are available on the accuracy of single photon emission tomography (SPECT) compared with MRI for the assessment of meniscal tears. Our objective was to assess the value of SPECT in comparison to MRI.

Methods: Between January 2003 and March 2004, sixteen patients were studied with both modalities and the accuracy rates of SPECT scan results, and MRI findings in the diagnosis of meniscal tears were compared. Arthroscopy was the gold standard.

Results: The respective sensitivity rate, specificity rate, and positive and negative predictive accuracies of MRI were 89%, 94%, 93%, and 79% and for SPECT those were 78%, 94%, 94%, and 88%. There was good agreement on the presence or absence of tears between two modalities (κ statistic = 0.699).

Conclusion: SPECT and MRI are both valuable imaging techniques. SPECT is a useful alternative when MRI is unavailable or unsuitable and it is beneficial when more possible accuracy is desired (such as when MRI results are either inconclusive or conflict with other clinical data).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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