TY - JOUR
T1 - Non-contrast versus contrast-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of spondylitis
T2 - A quantitative concordance-analysis
AU - Prasetyo, Marcel
AU - Sirath, Aldi Semanta
AU - Wicaksono, Krishna Pandu
AU - Prihartono, Joedo
AU - Setiawan, Stefanus Imanuel
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors wish to thank Daniel Ira Rosenthal, MD (The Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston) for inspiring this study.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/1
Y1 - 2020/1
N2 - Introduction: : Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging using gadolinium contrast media is an essential imaging modality in diagnosing spondylitis. However, gadolinium contrast is not widely available in Indonesia and relatively expensive. Many MR studies in Indonesia are performed without contrast administration. It is unclear how confident non-contrast MR can diagnose tuberculous spondylitis in comparison to standard contrast MR. Purposes: : This study aims to evaluate the concordance between the contrast MR and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. We also evaluate the interobserver agreement between the general radiologist and musculoskeletal radiologist in interpreting non-contrast MR of spondylitis. Materials and Methods: : A cross-sectional study using secondary data was performed to evaluate the concordance between the MR results regarding the usage of contrast media in diagnosing spondylitis. The inclusion criteria were patients over 17 years old who underwent complete sequences of contrast-enhanced MR examination of the spine, referred to radiology with the clinical diagnosis of suspected tuberculous spondylitis, spondylodiscitis, or both. All of the non-contrast and contrast-enhanced MR results were read and interpreted by two independent observers, a musculoskeletal radiologist and a general radiologist, blindly. The interobserver agreement analysis of the MR examination was conducted using Kappa and McNemar test. Results: : There was no significant difference between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing spondylitis (P= 0.368) and no significant difference in the interpretation of MR between the first and the second observer (P = 0.343). The concordance between the contrast and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing spondylitis (R: 0.88, P < 0.001) and the interpretation of MR between both observers (R: 0.65, P < 0.001) were showed in this study. Conclusion: : There is a high concordance between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. Although contrast MR is preferred as the standard imaging method of spondylitis, in case gadolinium contrast is unavailable, non-contrast MR can still provide valuable information in diagnosing spondylitis.
AB - Introduction: : Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging using gadolinium contrast media is an essential imaging modality in diagnosing spondylitis. However, gadolinium contrast is not widely available in Indonesia and relatively expensive. Many MR studies in Indonesia are performed without contrast administration. It is unclear how confident non-contrast MR can diagnose tuberculous spondylitis in comparison to standard contrast MR. Purposes: : This study aims to evaluate the concordance between the contrast MR and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. We also evaluate the interobserver agreement between the general radiologist and musculoskeletal radiologist in interpreting non-contrast MR of spondylitis. Materials and Methods: : A cross-sectional study using secondary data was performed to evaluate the concordance between the MR results regarding the usage of contrast media in diagnosing spondylitis. The inclusion criteria were patients over 17 years old who underwent complete sequences of contrast-enhanced MR examination of the spine, referred to radiology with the clinical diagnosis of suspected tuberculous spondylitis, spondylodiscitis, or both. All of the non-contrast and contrast-enhanced MR results were read and interpreted by two independent observers, a musculoskeletal radiologist and a general radiologist, blindly. The interobserver agreement analysis of the MR examination was conducted using Kappa and McNemar test. Results: : There was no significant difference between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing spondylitis (P= 0.368) and no significant difference in the interpretation of MR between the first and the second observer (P = 0.343). The concordance between the contrast and non-contrast spine MR in diagnosing spondylitis (R: 0.88, P < 0.001) and the interpretation of MR between both observers (R: 0.65, P < 0.001) were showed in this study. Conclusion: : There is a high concordance between the contrast and non-contrast MR in diagnosing tuberculous spondylitis. Although contrast MR is preferred as the standard imaging method of spondylitis, in case gadolinium contrast is unavailable, non-contrast MR can still provide valuable information in diagnosing spondylitis.
KW - Concordance-analysis
KW - Contrast-enhanced MR
KW - Non-contrast MR
KW - Spondylitis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097457318&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100306
DO - 10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100306
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85097457318
SN - 2352-0477
VL - 7
JO - European Journal of Radiology Open
JF - European Journal of Radiology Open
M1 - 100306
ER -