Skeletal radiology · 2020
Does image-guided biopsy of discitis-osteomyelitis provide meaningful information to impact clinical management?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lim Elisha, Walter William, Gyftopoulos Soterios, Samim Mohammad
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study are to assess the diagnostic yield of image-guided biopsy for discitis-osteomyelitis (DO), identify factors associated with biopsy yield (laboratory, pre-defined MRI findings, and biopsy technique), and impact of biopsy on management of patients appropriately selected according to the Infectious Disease Society of America guidelines (IDSA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent biopsy for suspected DO from 2011 to 2019. Reference standards to establish diagnosis of DO in order were histopathology/microbiology from biopsy or subsequent surgical sampling, positive blood culture or serology, and imaging/clinical follow-up. Laboratory markers, pre-biopsy antibiotics and MRI features, procedural-related variables, and impact of biopsy on management were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was also performed.
RESULTS: Out of 97 included patients, 78 were diagnosed with DO. Overall sensitivity of biopsy for detecting DO was 41.0% (32/78), including 10 patients with positive histopathology only, 14 with positive biopsy culture only, and 8 with both. Elevated ESR (p < 0.001) and epidural collection on MRI (p = 0.008) were associated with higher biopsy yield (63.6% and 68.6%, respectively) in a multivariable model. Procedural variables were not associated with yield. Biopsy results impacted the management in 19/77 (24.7%) patients, of whom 15/19 (78.9%) had treatment de-escalation and 4/19 (21.0%) had treatment escalation including starting new anti-tuberculous and anti-fungal regimens.
CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of biopsy for detecting DO was 41.0%. When IDSA guidelines are followed, biopsy provided impactful information that changed the management in 24.7% of patients. Evaluation for elevated ESR and epidural collection can help improve yield and patient selection for biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent biopsy for suspected DO from 2011 to 2019. Reference standards to establish diagnosis of DO in order were histopathology/microbiology from biopsy or subsequent surgical sampling, positive blood culture or serology, and imaging/clinical follow-up. Laboratory markers, pre-biopsy antibiotics and MRI features, procedural-related variables, and impact of biopsy on management were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was also performed.
RESULTS: Out of 97 included patients, 78 were diagnosed with DO. Overall sensitivity of biopsy for detecting DO was 41.0% (32/78), including 10 patients with positive histopathology only, 14 with positive biopsy culture only, and 8 with both. Elevated ESR (p < 0.001) and epidural collection on MRI (p = 0.008) were associated with higher biopsy yield (63.6% and 68.6%, respectively) in a multivariable model. Procedural variables were not associated with yield. Biopsy results impacted the management in 19/77 (24.7%) patients, of whom 15/19 (78.9%) had treatment de-escalation and 4/19 (21.0%) had treatment escalation including starting new anti-tuberculous and anti-fungal regimens.
CONCLUSION: Sensitivity of biopsy for detecting DO was 41.0%. When IDSA guidelines are followed, biopsy provided impactful information that changed the management in 24.7% of patients. Evaluation for elevated ESR and epidural collection can help improve yield and patient selection for biopsy.