The Accuracy of SPECT/CT for Diagnosing Lumbar Zygapophyseal Joint Pain: a Systematic Review
- 24 Downloads
To determine the accuracy of Tc-99m methylenediphosphonate single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT/CT) for the diagnosis of lumbar zygapophyseal joint-related pain with dual medial branch block (> 70% threshold) as the reference standard.
To date, the accuracy of SPECT/CT for the diagnosis of lumbar zygapophyseal joint pain has not been systematically reviewed.
One study met inclusion criteria. A prospective cohort study of 35 patients reported a prevalence of 24% (95% CI 9.0–40.0%) using dual medial branch blocks (MBBs) as the means of diagnosis and found that SPECT/CT had a sensitivity of 0.57 (95% CI 0.18–0.90), specificity of 0.77 (95% CI 0.55–0.92), LR+ of 2.51 (95% CI 0.92–6.85), and LR− of 0.55 (95% CI 0.23–1.34). According to OCEBM 2011 guidelines, the evidence is rated as level 3. More research is needed to determine the accuracy of SPECT/CT for the diagnosis of Z-joint pain, as technological improvement and interpretation could potentially improve overall diagnostic accuracy and reduce associated costs.
KeywordsLow back Pain Z-joint Zygapophyseal Neurotomy Imaging
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Zachary McCormick reports serving on the Board of Directors of the Spine Intervention Society. Ryan Spiker reports relationships with DePuy, Johnson&Johnson Company, and Synthes; and personal feeds from K2M, Nexus and NEXXT outside the submitted work. Aaron Conger, Taylor Burnham, Rebecca Speckman, Dustin Randall, Raquel Reisinger, Quinn Tate, Bryon Schneider, and Daniel Cushman declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 4.Bogduk N. Practice guidelines for spinal diagnostic and treatment procedures. 2nd ed. San Francisco: International Spine Intervention Society; 2013.Google Scholar
- 16.Jarvik JG, Hollingworth W, Heagerty PJ, Haynor DR, Boyko EJ, Deyo RA. Three-year incidence of low back pain in an initially asymptomatic cohort. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30:1541–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000167536.60002.87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Bono C, Baisden J, Baker R, et al. NASS coverage policy recommendations. Burr Ridge: North American Spine Society; 2014.Google Scholar
- 30.Whiting PF. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–36. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 35.Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Greenhalgh T, Heneghan C, Liberati A, et al. Explanation of the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (OCEBM) levels of evidence (background document). Oxford Cent Evidence-Based Med. 2011:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1532-3382(09)00031-1.
- 37.•• Freiermuth D, Kretzschmar M, Bilecen D, Schaeren S, Jacob AL, Aeschbach A, et al. Correlation of 99m Tc-DPD SPECT/CT scan findings and diagnostic blockades of lumbar medial branches in patients with unspecific low back pain in a randomized-controlled trial. Pain Med. 2015;16:1916–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12841. The only study identified in the literature designed to appropriately evaluted the accuracy of SPECT/CT for diagnosis of lumbar Z-joint pain using dual MBB as the references standard. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 41.• Lehman VT, Murphy RC, Kaufmann TJ, Diehn FE, Murthy NS, Wald JT, et al. Frequency of discordance between facet joint activity on technetium Tc99m methylene diphosphonate SPECT/CT and selection for percutaneous treatment at a large multispecialty institution. Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35:609–14. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3731. Single center retrospective cohort study demonstrating poor agreement between facet joint activity on SPECT/CT and facet joint signal on fat suppressed MRI sequences. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 43.Lehman VT, Murphy RC, Schenck LA, Carter RE, Johnson GB, Kotsenas AL, et al. Comparison of facet joint activity on 99mTc-MDP SPECT/CT with facet joint signal change on MRI with fat suppression. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22:277–83. https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2015.15203.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 49.Jan-ASC-Addenda n.d. https://www.cms.gov/apps/ama/license.asp?file=/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/ASCPayment/Downloads/2018-Jan-ASC-Addenda.zip (accessed March 27, 2019).
- 50.CMS-1693-F 2018. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/PhysicianFeeSched/PFS-Federal-Regulation-Notices-Items/CMS-1693-F.html (accessed March 27, 2019).
- 54.• Gupta SK, Trethewey S, Brooker B, Rutherford N, Diffey J, Viswanathan S, et al. Radionuclide bone scan SPECT-CT: lowering the dose of CT significantly reduces radiation dose without impacting CT image quality. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;7:63–73. Single center retrospective cohort study demonstrating reduced SPECT/CT radiation exposure with comparable image quality achieved by modifying CT acquisition parameters. PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 56.Conger A, Burnham T, Cushman DM, Cunningham S, Teramoto M, Kendall R, et al. Does updated compared to older fluoroscopic imaging technology reduce radiation dose during interventional spine procedures? A pragmatic cohort study. J Quant Res Rehabil Med. 2018;1:56–60.Google Scholar
- 57.Mossman KL, Goldman M, Masse F, Mills WA, Schiager KJ, Vetter RJ. Health Physics Society position statement: radiation risk in perspective. Heal Phys Soc Newsl. 1996;March:3.Google Scholar