Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Jan 5;93(1):20-8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.01523.
There is no consensus on the optimum imaging method to use to confirm the diagnosis of true scaphoid fractures among patients with suspected scaphoid fractures. This study tested the null hypothesis that computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have the same diagnostic performance characteristics for the diagnosis of scaphoid fractures.
Thirty-four consecutive patients with a suspected scaphoid fracture (tenderness of the scaphoid and normal radiographic findings after a fall on the outstretched hand) underwent CT and MRI within ten days after a wrist injury. The reference standard for a true fracture of the scaphoid was six-week follow-up radiographs in four views. A panel including surgeons and radiologists came to a consensus diagnosis for each type of imaging. The images were considered in a randomly ordered, blinded fashion, independent of the other types of imaging. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as well as positive and negative predictive values.
The reference standard revealed six true fractures of the scaphoid (prevalence, 18%). CT demonstrated a fracture in five patients (15%), with one false-positive, two false-negative, and four true-positive results. MRI demonstrated a fracture in seven patients (21%), with three false-positive, two false-negative, and four true-positive results. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 67%, 96%, and 91%, respectively, for CT and 67%, 89%, and 85%, respectively, for MRI. According to the McNemar test for paired binary data, these differences were not significant. The positive predictive value with use of the Bayes formula was 0.76 for CT and 0.54 for MRI. The negative predictive value was 0.94 for CT and 0.93 for MRI.
CT and MRI had comparable diagnostic characteristics. Both were better at excluding scaphoid fractures than they were at confirming them, and both were subject to false-positive and false-negative interpretations. The best reference standard is debatable, but it is now unclear whether or not bone edema on MRI and small unicortical lines on CT represent a true fracture.
在疑似舟状骨骨折的患者中,用于确诊真性舟状骨骨折的最佳影像学方法尚未达成共识。本研究旨在验证 CT 和 MRI 对舟状骨骨折的诊断具有相同的性能特征这一无效假设。
34 例疑似舟状骨骨折(手撑地摔伤后,舟状骨区域压痛,影像学检查未见异常)患者在腕部受伤后 10 天内分别进行 CT 和 MRI 检查。舟状骨骨折的参考标准为六周时的正位、侧位、斜位和轴位 X 线片。由外科医生和放射科医生组成的专家组对每种影像学方法的结果进行综合诊断。阅片时,影像顺序随机、双盲,与其他影像学方法无关。我们计算了灵敏度、特异性、准确性以及阳性和阴性预测值。
参考标准显示 6 例患者存在真性舟状骨骨折(发生率 18%)。CT 检查发现 5 例患者存在骨折(15%),1 例假阳性,2 例假阴性,4 例真阳性。MRI 检查发现 7 例患者存在骨折(21%),3 例假阳性,2 例假阴性,4 例真阳性。CT 的灵敏度、特异性和准确性分别为 67%、96%和 91%,MRI 分别为 67%、89%和 85%。根据配对二项分类数据的 McNemar 检验,这些差异无统计学意义。应用贝叶斯公式计算阳性预测值,CT 为 0.76,MRI 为 0.54。阴性预测值 CT 为 0.94,MRI 为 0.93。
CT 和 MRI 的诊断特征相当。两者在排除舟状骨骨折方面均优于确诊骨折,且均存在假阳性和假阴性结果。目前,最佳参考标准存在争议,MRI 上的骨水肿和 CT 上的单皮质线是否代表真性骨折仍不清楚。