Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33090251›Full record

SynthesisSkeletal radiology2021

Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT for detecting bone marrow edema in patients with acute knee injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mitchell P Wilson, Kevin Lui, Dorian Nobbee, Mohammad H Murad, Prayash Katlariwala, Gavin Low

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Skeletal radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mitchell P WilsonDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, 2B2.41 WMC, 8440-112 Street NW, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada. mitch.wilson@ualberta.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1630-5138
Kevin LuiDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, 2B2.41 WMC, 8440-112 Street NW, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Dorian NobbeeDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, 2B2.41 WMC, 8440-112 Street NW, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Mohammad H MuradEvidence-based Practice Center, Mayo Clinic, Room 2-54, 205 3rd Ave SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Prayash KatlariwalaDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, 2B2.41 WMC, 8440-112 Street NW, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Gavin LowDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, 2B2.41 WMC, 8440-112 Street NW, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2B7, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT (DECT) for detecting bone marrow edema (BME) in adult patients with acute knee injuries.

methodsA systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and gray literature was performed from inception to January 31, 2020, using PRISMA-DTA guidelines. The review included studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of DECT for detecting BME in at least 10 adult patients with acute knee injuries and with an MRI reference standard. Study details were independently extracted by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate mixed-effects regression model with subgroup analysis performed to evaluate for sources of variability. Risk of bias (ROB) was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool.

resultsEight studies evaluating 267 patients between the ages of 25-54 with acute knee injuries undergoing DECT and MRI were included in analysis. Summary sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC values for BME were 84% (95% confidence interval (CI) 74-91%), 96% (95% CI 93-98%), and 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98), respectively. Bone-based characterization was found to have lower specificity than region-based characterization (83% (57-95%) versus 97 (96-98%), p < 0.05), but no difference in sensitivity. No other statistical differences were identified amongst study subgroups to account for presumed variability amongst studies. Most studies were rated low risk for bias and applicability concerns.

conclusionDECT is specific and accurate for detecting BME in adult patients with acute knee injuries and can be used as an alternative to MRI, particularly when MRI is contraindicated or unavailable.

Indexed as

Bone MarrowKnee InjuriesAdultEdemaHumansMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedAccuracyBoneComputed tomographyDual-energyKneeMarrow edemaMeta-analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33090251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.