ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Osteomyelitis of the Lower Limb: Diagnostic Accuracy of Dual-Energy CT versus MRI.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- What you don't see matters: dual-energy CT in emergency radiology.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Review
- The accuracy of spectral CT with quantitative parameters in differentiating septic from aseptic periprosthetic complications.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Twenty common errors in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of fracture-related infection (FRI).Journal of bone and joint infection · 2026Review
- Reply to the Letter to the Editor: Reevaluating DECT in early spondylodiscitis for comprehensive diagnosis.European radiology · 2025Article
- Study of the extent of surgical osteotomy in Cierny-Mader stages III and IV chronic osteomyelitis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Dual-Energy CT and Pedal Osteomyelitis.Radiology · 2025Article
- Spondylodiscitis of the thoraco-lumbar spine: diagnostic performance of dual-energy CT vs MRI.European radiology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Use of Preventive Antibiotic Therapy in Patients Undergoing One-Step Prosthetic Revision Surgery with Low Preoperative Infectious Risk.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Reply to Maffulli, N.; Spiezia, F. Comment on "Foti et al. Identification of Achille's Tendon Tears: Diagnostic Accuracy of Dual-Energy CT with Respect to MRI.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Lower extremity infections: Essential anatomy and multimodality imaging findings.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- The Clinical Utility of Lower Extremity Dual-Energy CT Angiography in the Detection of Bone Marrow Edema in Diabetic Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Dual-Energy CT Arthrography: Advanced Muscolo-Skelatal Applications in Clinical Practice.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMRI is the preferred imaging technique for the identification of osteomyelitis. The key element for diagnosis is the presence of bone marrow edema (BME). Dual-energy CT (DECT) is an alternative tool which is able to identify BME in the lower limb. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance of DECT and MRI for osteomyelitis, using clinical, microbiological, and imaging data as reference standards. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective single-center study enrolled consecutive patients with suspected bone infections undergoing DECT and MRI imaging from December 2020 to June 2022. Four blinded radiologists with various experience levels (range of 3-21 years) evaluated the imaging findings. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed in the presence of BMEs, abscesses, sinus tracts, bone reabsorption, or gaseous elements. The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values of each method were determined and compared using a multi-reader multi-case analysis. A
resultsIn total, 44 study participants (mean age 62.5 years ± 16.5 [SD], 32 men) were evaluated. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed in 32 participants. For the MRI, the mean sensitivity and specificity were 89.1% and 87.5%, while for the DECT they were 89.0% and 72.9%, respectively. The DECT demonstrated a good diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.88), compared with the MRI (AUC = 0.92) (
conclusionDual-energy CT demonstrated a good diagnostic performance in detecting osteomyelitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.