TY - JOUR
T1 - Superiority of Multidetector Computed Tomography with 3-Dimensional Volume Rendering over Plain Radiography in the Assessment of Spinal Surgical Instrumentation Complications in Patients with Cancer
AU - Debnam, James M.
AU - Chi, Tzehping L.
AU - Ketonen, Leena
AU - Wei, Wei
AU - Guha-Thakurta, Nandita
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - Objective The objective of this study was to compare multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images with volume-rendered translucent display (VRTLD) series to plain radiographs for evaluating spinal surgical instrumentation after resection and reconstruction for spinal malignancies. Methods In 44 patients with tumor resection and spinal reconstruction, 17 with complications, 3 neuroradiologists evaluated plain radiographs, MDCT images alone, VRTLD images alone, and MDCT images with VRTLD images for identifying complications in 3 categories: subsidence/migration, construct fracture, and screw loosening. Each category was scored as 1 (complications), 2 (no complications), or 3 (not sure), and the minimum score was used for analyses. Clinical/surgical outcomes were the reference standard. Results Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (95% confidence interval), respectively, were as follows: MDCT/VRTLD, 100%, 100%, 100% (91.96%-100.00%); MDCT alone, 88.24%, 100%, 95.45% (84.53%-99.44%); VRTLD alone, 82.35%, 96.3%, 90.91% (78.33%-97.47%); plain radiographs, 52.94%, 100%, 81.82% (67.29%-91.81%). Conclusions Multidetector computed tomography with VRTLD series seems best for evaluation of spinal instrumentation after tumor resection and reconstruction.
AB - Objective The objective of this study was to compare multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images with volume-rendered translucent display (VRTLD) series to plain radiographs for evaluating spinal surgical instrumentation after resection and reconstruction for spinal malignancies. Methods In 44 patients with tumor resection and spinal reconstruction, 17 with complications, 3 neuroradiologists evaluated plain radiographs, MDCT images alone, VRTLD images alone, and MDCT images with VRTLD images for identifying complications in 3 categories: subsidence/migration, construct fracture, and screw loosening. Each category was scored as 1 (complications), 2 (no complications), or 3 (not sure), and the minimum score was used for analyses. Clinical/surgical outcomes were the reference standard. Results Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (95% confidence interval), respectively, were as follows: MDCT/VRTLD, 100%, 100%, 100% (91.96%-100.00%); MDCT alone, 88.24%, 100%, 95.45% (84.53%-99.44%); VRTLD alone, 82.35%, 96.3%, 90.91% (78.33%-97.47%); plain radiographs, 52.94%, 100%, 81.82% (67.29%-91.81%). Conclusions Multidetector computed tomography with VRTLD series seems best for evaluation of spinal instrumentation after tumor resection and reconstruction.
KW - complications
KW - multidetector computed tomography
KW - reconstruction
KW - spine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060032535&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060032535&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000784
DO - 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000784
M3 - Article
C2 - 30211796
AN - SCOPUS:85060032535
SN - 0363-8715
VL - 43
SP - 76
EP - 84
JO - Journal of computer assisted tomography
JF - Journal of computer assisted tomography
IS - 1
ER -