Advertisement

Performance of a rapid two-sequence screening protocol for osteomyelitis of the foot

  • Adam D. SingerEmail author
  • Monica Umpierrez
  • Aparna Kakarala
  • Marcos C. Schechter
  • Michael Maceroli
  • Gulshan B. Sharma
  • Ravi R. Rajani
Scientific Article

Abstract

Objective

Compare a two sequence protocol to a standard protocol in the detection of pedal osteomyelitis (OM) and abscesses and to identify patients that benefit from a full protocol.

Materials and methods

One hundred thirty-two foot MRIs ordered to assess for OM were enrolled, and the following items were extracted from the clinical reports: use of IV contrast, the presence of OM, reactive osteitis, and a soft tissue abscess. Using only one T1 nonfat-suppressed and one fluid sensitive fat-suppressed sequences, two experienced musculoskeletal radiologists reviewed each case for the presence of OM, reactive osteitis, or an abscess. A Kappa test was calculated to assess for interobserver agreement, and diagnostic performance was determined. The McNemar test was used to assess for the effect of contrast.

Results

Agreement between both observers and the clinical report on the presence of osteomyelitis was substantial ( k = 0.63 and 0.72, p < 0.001), while the agreement for abscess was fair (k = 0.29 and 0.38, p < 0.001). For osteomyelitis, both observers showed good accuracy (0.85 and 0.86). When screening bone for a normal versus abnormal case, this method was highly sensitive (0.97–0.98), but was less sensitive for abscess (0.63–0.75). Fifty-one percent of exams used contrast, and it did impact the diagnosis of abscess for one observer.

Conclusion

This rapid protocol is accurate in making the diagnosis of OM, and its high sensitivity makes it useful to screen for patients that would benefit from a full protocol.

Keywords

MRI Screening Osteomyelitis Pedal Foot 

Abbreviations

OM

Osteomyelitis

RO

Reactive osteitis

EO

Early osteomyelitis

DFU

Diabetic foot ulcer

IV

Intravenous

ACR

American College of Radiology

BKA

Below the knee amputation

STIR

Short tau inversion recovery

Notes

Author contributions

Drs. Umpierrez and Kakarala did the review of the 132 cases. Drs. Maceroli and Rajani provided the surgical insight for the project from an orthopedic and vascualar surgery perspective, respectively. Dr. Schechter provided insight from an infectious disease perspective. Dr. Sharma helped with statistics. All authors were involved in drafting and editing the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Geraghty T, LaPorta G. Current health and economic burden of chronic diabetic osteomyelitis. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2019;19(3):279–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Armstrong DG, Boulton AJM, Bus SA. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(24):2367–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schweitzer ME, Daffner RH, Weissman BN, Bennett DL, Blebea JS, Jacobson JA, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria on suspected osteomyelitis in patients with diabetes mellitus. J Am Coll Radiol. 2008;5(8):881–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Al-Khawari HA, Al-Saeed OM, Jumaa TH, Chishti F. Evaluating diabetic foot infection with magnetic resonance imaging: Kuwait experience. Med Princ Pract. 2005;14(3):165–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ledermann HP, Morrison WB, Schweitzer ME. Pedal abscesses in patients suspected of having pedal osteomyelitis: analysis with MR imaging. Radiology. 2002;224(3):649–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kapoor A, Page S, Lavalley M, Gale DR, Felson DT. Magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing foot osteomyelitis: a meta-analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(2):125–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mahendra M, Singh R. Diagnostic accuracy and surgical utility of MRI in complicated diabetic foot. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(7):RC01–4.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chow I, Lemos EV, Einarson TR. Management and prevention of diabetic foot ulcers and infections: a health economic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(12):1019–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kan JH, Estrada C, Hasan U, Bracikowski A, Shyr Y, Shakhtour B, et al. Management of occult fractures in the skeletally immature patient: cost analysis of implementing a limited trauma magnetic resonance imaging protocol. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2009;25(4):226–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    May LA, Chen DC, Bui-Mansfield LT, O'Brien SD. Rapid magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of femoral neck stress fractures in a U.S. active duty military population. Mil Med. 2017;182(1):e1619–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    May DA, Disler DG. Screening for avascular necrosis of the hip with rapid MRI: preliminary experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2000;24(2):284–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ross AB, Chan BY, Yi PH, Repplinger MD, Vanness DJ, Lee KS. Diagnostic accuracy of an abbreviated MRI protocol for detecting radiographically occult hip and pelvis fractures in the elderly. Skelet Radiol. 2019;48(1):103–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khurana B, Okanobo H, Ossiani M, Ledbetter S, Al Dulaimy K, Sodickson A. Abbreviated MRI for patients presenting to the emergency department with hip pain. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(6):W581–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Khoury NJ, Birjawi GA, Chaaya M, Hourani MH. Use of limited MR protocol (coronal STIR) in the evaluation of patients with hip pain. Skelet Radiol. 2003;32(10):567–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kotecha HM, Lo HS, Vedantham S, Shin H, Cerniglia CA. Abbreviated MRI of the foot in patients with suspected osteomyelitis. Emerg Radiol. 2019.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hallgren KA.  Computing Inter-Rater Reliability for Observational Data: An Overview and Tutorial.  Tutor Quant Methods Psychol. 2012;8(1):23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duryea D, Bernard S, Flemming D, Walker E, French C. Outcomes in diabetic foot ulcer patients with isolated T2 marrow signal abnormality in the underlying bone: should the diagnosis of "osteitis" be changed to "early osteomyelitis"? Skelet Radiol. 2017;46(10):1327–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ledermann HP, Schweitzer ME, Morrison WB. Nonenhancing tissue on MR imaging of pedal infection: characterization of necrotic tissue and associated limitations for diagnosis of osteomyelitis and abscess. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178(1):215–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morrison WB, Schweitzer ME, Wapner KL, Hecht PJ, Gannon FH, Behm WR. Osteomyelitis in feet of diabetics: clinical accuracy, surgical utility, and cost-effectiveness of MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;196(2):557–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meyr AJ, Singh S, Zhang X, Khilko N, Mukherjee A, Sheridan MJ, et al. Statistical reliability of bone biopsy for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2011;50(6):663–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chadayammuri V, Herbert B, Hao J, Mavrogenis A, Quispe JC, Kim JW, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of various modalities relative to open bone biopsy for detection of long bone posttraumatic osteomyelitis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2017;27(7):871–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Elmarsafi T, Kumar A, Cooper PS, Steinberg JS, Evans KK, Attinger CE, et al. Concordance between bone pathology and bone culture for the diagnosis of osteomyelitis in the presence of Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2018;57(5):919–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meyr AJ, Seo K, Khurana JS, Choksi R, Chakraborty B. Level of agreement with a multi-test approach to the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2018;57(6):1137–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ramanujam CL, Han D, Zgonis T. Medical imaging and laboratory analysis of diagnostic accuracy in 107 consecutive hospitalized patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis and partial foot amputations. Foot Ankle Spec. 2018;11(5):433–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam D. Singer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Monica Umpierrez
    • 1
  • Aparna Kakarala
    • 1
  • Marcos C. Schechter
    • 2
  • Michael Maceroli
    • 3
  • Gulshan B. Sharma
    • 4
  • Ravi R. Rajani
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Division of Musculoskeletal ImagingEmory University HospitalAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious DiseaseEmory University HospitalAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryEmory University HospitalAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.University of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  5. 5.Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular SurgeryEmory University HospitalAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations