Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40494906›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Diagnostic accuracy of dual energy computed tomography for suspected pyogenic spondylodiscitis.

Carsten Stelbrink, Paul Jahnke, Friedemann Goehler, Yan Klosterkemper, Matthias Pumberger, Friederike Schömig, Niklas Tuttle, Kerstin Rubarth, Torsten Diekhoff, Julian Pohlan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

10 authors.

Carsten StelbrinkDepartment of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. carsten.stelbrink@charite.de.
Paul JahnkeDepartment of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Friedemann GoehlerDepartment of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Yan KlosterkemperDepartment of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Matthias PumbergerDepartment of Spine Surgery, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Friederike SchömigDepartment of Spine Surgery, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Niklas TuttleDepartment of Spine Surgery, Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Kerstin RubarthInstitute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Torsten Diekhoff *Department of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Julian Pohlan *Department of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the diagnostic method of choice, we here analyze the diagnostic potential of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) in differentiating abnormal discs from normal-appearing discs and in differentiating between infectious and degenerative conditions. Twenty-eight patients with suspected spondylodiscitis who underwent DECT and MRI of the spine were retrospectively included. Eighteen patients were diagnosed with spondylodiscitis and ten patients with degenerative disc disease. A combined clinical reference standard for the diagnosis was used. One abnormal disc and one normal-appearing disc per patient were included. Three blinded readers analyzed CT, DECT cMaps and MRI images. Quantitative analysis was performed in standardized regions of interest placed in each of the two discs included. Mixed-model analysis was used to identify correlations between CT density alterations and spondylodiscitis or degenerative disc disease. Diagnostic accuracy for differentiating abnormal discs and normal-appearing discs: 69.7% (95% CI, 56.0 to 81.2) for CT, 76.8% (95% CI, 63.6 to 87.0) for CT + DECT, 58.9% (95% CI, 45.0 to 71.9) for MRI; for differentiating spondylodiscitis and degenerative disc disease: 64.3% (95% CI, 44.1 to 81.4) for CT, 60.7% (95% CI, 40.6 to 78.5) for CT + DECT, 53.6% (95% CI, 33.9 to 72.5) for MRI. Mixed-model analysis revealed that normal-appearing discs had higher average density than abnormal discs in DECT (mean difference = 47.0 HU (95% CI, 32.8 to 61.3), p = < 0.001). In summary, both qualitative and quantitative DECT can distinguish normal-appearing discs from abnormal discs. Spondylodiscitis and degenerative disc disease were not distinguished accurately by DECT in this study.

Indexed as

DiscitisIntervertebral Disc DegenerationTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansIntervertebral DiscMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesCMapDegenerationDual-energy computed tomographyMagnetic resonance imagingSpineSpondylodiscitis

Identifiers

PMID40494906
PMCPMC12152176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.