A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

MR imaging findings in spinal infections: rules or myths? | LitMetric

Purpose: To systematically evaluate magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings described as being indicative of spinal infection in patients with proven spinal infection.

Materials And Methods: Contrast material-enhanced spinal MR images obtained in 46 consecutive patients (22 women, 24 men; mean age, 58.2 years) with culture or histologic examination results positive for spinal infection were systematically evaluated by two observers. Tuberculous and postoperative infections were excluded. Disk signal intensity and disk height, presence of the nuclear cleft, vertebral signal intensity alterations, endplate erosions on T1-weighted MR images, and presence of paraspinal or epidural inflammation were evaluated. Patient charts and surgical reports were reviewed.

Results: In the 44 patients with disk infection, MR imaging criteria with good to excellent sensitivity included presence of paraspinal or epidural inflammation (n = 43, 97.7% sensitivity), disk enhancement (n = 42, 95.4% sensitivity), hyperintensity or fluid-equivalent disk signal intensity on T2-weighted MR images (n = 41, 93.2% sensitivity), and erosion or destruction of at least one vertebral endplate (n = 37, 84.1% sensitivity). Effacement of the nuclear cleft was only applicable in 18 patients (n = 15, 83.3% sensitivity). Criteria with low sensitivity included decreased height of the intervertebral space (n = 23, 52.3% sensitivity) and disk hypointensity on T1-weighted MR images (n = 13, 29.5% sensitivity). Involvement of several spinal levels occurred in seven (16%) patients. Other spinal infections included isolated vertebral osteomyelitis (n = 1) and primary epidural abscess (n = 1).

Conclusion: Most MR imaging criteria commonly used to diagnose disk infections offer good to excellent sensitivity. In atypical manifestations of proven spinal infections, however, some of the classically described MR imaging criteria may not be observed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2282020752DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

spinal infections
12
signal intensity
12
imaging criteria
12
sensitivity
10
imaging findings
8
spinal
8
spinal infection
8
proven spinal
8
disk signal
8
nuclear cleft
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!