Influence of imaging on clinical decision making in the treatment of lower back pain

Diagnostics and treatment of acute non-specific low back pain: do physicians follow the guidelines?

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines for acute non-specific low back pain recommend avoiding imaging studies, refraining from strong opioids and invasive treatments, and providing information to patients to stay active. Despite these recommendations, many patients undergo diagnostic and therapeutic assessments that are not in line with the current evidence.

AIM

To assess the management of acute non-specific low back pain by Swiss general practitioners (GPs) and their adherence to guideline recommendations.

METHODS

We performed a survey using two clinical case vignettes of patients with acute non-specific low back pain without red flags or neurological deficits. The main differences between the vignettes were sex, age, profession, pain duration and medical history. GPs were asked about their management of those patients.

RESULTS

Of 1253 GPs, 61% reported knowing current clinical guidelines and 76% being aware of "Choosing Wisely" recommendations. Diagnostic evaluations included X-ray (18% for vignette 1, 32% for vignette 2) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (31% and 62%). For pain management, GPs recommended mostly non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol and metamizole. Treatments with potential harm included muscle relaxants (78% and 77%), oral steroids (26% and 33%), long-acting opioids (8% and 11%) and spinal injections (28% and 42%). A very high proportion recommended activity restrictions (82% and 71%) and some recommended bed rest (3% and 2%).

CONCLUSION

Although GPs reported being aware of current guideline recommendations, management of acute non-specific low back pain was not in line with these recommendations. A substantial proportion of GPs considered imaging, treatments (e.g. muscle relaxants, long-acting strong opioids), and activity and work restrictions with potentially harmful consequences.

Management of acute non-specific low back pain in the emergency department: do emergency physicians follow the guidelines? Results of a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Clinical guidelines for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) recommend avoiding imaging studies or invasive treatments and to advise patients to stay active. The aim of this study was to evaluate the management of acute non-specific LBP in the emergency departments (ED).

SETTING

We invited all department chiefs of Swiss EDs and their physician staff to participate in a web-based survey using two clinical case vignettes of patients with acute non-specific LBP presenting to an ED. In both cases, no neurological deficits or red flags were present. Guideline adherence and low-value care was defined based on current guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

In total, 263 ED physicians completed at least one vignette, while 212 completed both vignettes (43% residents, 32% senior/attending physicians and 24% chief physicians). MRI was considered in 31% in vignette 1 and 65% in vignette 2. For pain management, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol and metamizole were mostly used. A substantial proportion of ED physicians considered treatments with questionable benefit and/or increased risk for adverse events such as oral steroids (vignette 1, 12% and vignette 2, 19%), muscle relaxants (33% and 38%), long-acting strong opioids (25% and 33%) and spinal injections (22% and 43%). Although guidelines recommend staying active, 72% and 67% of ED physicians recommended activity restrictions.

CONCLUSION

Management of acute non-specific LBP in the ED was not in agreement with current guideline recommendations in a substantial proportion of ED physicians. Overuse of imaging studies, the use of long-acting opioids and muscle relaxants, as well as recommendations for activity and work restrictions were prevalent and may potentially be harmful.

Validation of an automated shape-matching algorithm for biplane radiographic spine osteokinematics and radiostereometric analysis error quantification

Biplane radiography and associated shape-matching provides non-invasive, dynamic, 3D osteo- and arthrokinematic analysis. Due to the complexity of data acquisition, each system should be validated for the anatomy of interest. The purpose of this study was to assess our system’s acquisition methods and validate a custom, automated 2D/3D shape-matching algorithm relative to radiostereometric analysis (RSA) for the cervical and lumbar spine. Additionally, two sources of RSA error were examined via a Monte Carlo simulation: 1) static bead centroid identification and 2) dynamic bead tracking error. Tantalum beads were implanted into a cadaver for RSA and cervical and lumbar spine flexion and lateral bending were passively simulated. A bead centroid identification reliability analysis was performed and a vertebral validation block was used to determine bead tracking accuracy. Our system’s overall root mean square error (RMSE) for the cervical spine ranged between 0.21–0.49mm and 0.42–1.80° and the lumbar spine ranged between 0.35–1.17mm and 0.49–1.06°. The RMSE associated with RSA ranged between 0.14–0.69mm and 0.96–2.33° for bead centroid identification and 0.25–1.19mm and 1.69–4.06° for dynamic bead tracking. The results of this study demonstrate our system’s ability to accurately quantify segmental spine motion. Additionally, RSA errors should be considered when interpreting biplane validation results.

Current evidence for spinal X-ray use in the chiropractic profession: a narrative review

The use of routine spinal X-rays within chiropractic has a contentious history. Elements of the profession advocate for the need for routine spinal X-rays to improve patient management, whereas other chiropractors advocate using spinal X-rays only when endorsed by current imaging guidelines. This review aims to summarise the current evidence for the use of spinal X-ray in chiropractic practice, with consideration of the related risks and benefits. Current evidence supports the use of spinal X-rays only in the diagnosis of trauma and spondyloarthropathy, and in the assessment of progressive spinal structural deformities such as adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. MRI is indicated to diagnose serious pathology such as cancer or infection, and to assess the need for surgical management in radiculopathy and spinal stenosis. Strong evidence demonstrates risks of imaging such as excessive radiation exposure, overdiagnosis, subsequent low-value investigation and treatment procedures, and increased costs. In most cases the potential benefits from routine imaging, including spinal X-rays, do not outweigh the potential harms. The use of spinal X-rays should not be routinely performed in chiropractic practice, and should be guided by clinical guidelines and clinician judgement.

Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine: determining clinical impact and potential harm from overuse

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging is frequently said to be "overused" in the evaluation of low back pain, yet data concerning the extent of overuse and the potential harmful effects are lacking.

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to determine the proportion of examinations with a detectable impact on patient care (actionable outcomes).

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 5,365 outpatient lumbar spine magnetic resonance (MR) examinations were conducted.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Actionable outcomes included (1) findings leading to an intervention making use of anatomical information such as surgery; (2) new diagnoses of cancer, infection, or fracture; or (3) following known lumbar spine pathology. Potential harm was assessed by identifying examinations where suspicion of cancer or infection was raised but no positive diagnosis made.

METHODS

A medical record aggregation/search system was used to identify lumbar spine MR examinations with positive outcome measures. Patient notes were examined to verify outcomes. A random sample was manually inspected to identify missed positive outcomes.

RESULTS

The proportion of actionable lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging was 13%, although 93% were appropriate according to the American College of Radiology guidelines. Of 36 suspected cases of cancer or infection, 81% were false positives. Further investigations were ordered on 59% of suspicious examinations, 86% of which were false positives.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of lumbar spine MR examinations that inform management is small. The false-positive rate and the proportion of false positives involving further investigation are high. Further study to improve the efficiency of imaging is warranted.

Greater Tuberosity Fractures: Does Fracture Assessment and Treatment Recommendation Vary Based on Imaging Modality?

BACKGROUND

For greater tuberosity fractures, 5-mm displacement is a commonly used threshold for recommending surgery; however, it is unclear if displacement can be assessed with this degree of precision and reliability using plain radiographs. It also is unclear if CT images provide additional information that might change decision making.

QUESTION/PURPOSES

We asked: (1) Does interobserver agreement for assessment of the amount and direction of fracture-fragment displacement vary based on imaging modality (radiographs only; 2-dimensional [2-D] CT images and radiographs; and 3-dimensional [3-D] and 2-D CT images and radiographs)? (2) Does the likelihood of recommending surgery vary based on imaging modality? (3) Does the level of confidence regarding the decision for treatment vary based on imaging modality?

METHODS

We invited 791 orthopaedic surgeons to complete a survey on greater tuberosity fractures. One hundred eighty (23%) responded and were randomized on a 1:1:1 basis in one of the three imaging modality groups and evaluated the same set of 22 fractures. We described age, sex, mechanism of injury, days between injury and imaging, and that patients had no comorbidities or signs of neurovascular damage for every case. One hundred sixty-four of the 180 respondents completed the study and there was an imbalance in noncompletion between the three groups (two of 67 [3.0%] in the radiograph only group; nine of 57 [16%] in the 2-D CT and radiograph group; and five of 56 [8.9%] in the 3-D CT, 2-D CT, and radiograph group; p = 0.043 by Fisher's exact test). Participants assessed amount (in millimeters) and direction (posterosuperior/posteroinferior/anterosuperior/anteroinferior/no displacement) of displacement; recommended treatment (surgical or nonoperative); and indicated their level of confidence regarding the recommended treatment on a scale from 0 to 10 for every case. Overall recommendation for treatment was expressed as a surgery score per surgeon by dividing the amount of cases they would operate on by the total number of cases (n = 22) and presented as a percentage. Confidence regarding the decision for treatment was calculated by averaging the confidence score per surgeon, ranging from 0 to 10. We compared interobserver agreement using kappa for categorical variables and intraclass correlation (ICC) for continuous variables. We used multivariable linear regression to assess difference in surgery score and confidence level between imaging groups, controlling for surgeon characteristics.

RESULTS

Interobserver agreement for assessment of amount (radiographs: ICC, 0.55, 2-D CT + radiographs ICC, 0.53, 3-D CT + 2-D CT + radiographs ICC, 0.57; p values on all comparisons >0.7) and direction (radiographs: kappa, 0.30, 2-D CT + radiographs kappa, 0.43, 3-D CT + 2-D CT + radiographs kappa, 0.40; p values for all comparisons >0.096) of displacement did not vary by imaging modality. 2-D CT and radiographs (β regression coefficient [β], 3.1; p = 0.253) and 3-D CT, 2-D CT and radiographs (β, 1.6; p = 0.561) did not result in a difference in recommendation for surgery compared with radiographs alone. 2-D CT and radiographs (β, 0.40; p = 0.021) and 3-D CT, 2-D CT and radiographs (β, 0.44; p = 0.011) were associated with slightly higher levels of confidence compared with radiographs alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging modality, with the numbers evaluated, does not influence interobserver agreement of greater tuberosity fracture assessment, nor did it influence the recommendation for surgical treatment. However, surgeons did feel slightly more confident about their treatment recommendation when assessing CT images with radiographs compared with radiographs alone. Our results therefore suggest no additional value of CT scans for assessment of greater tuberosity fractures when displacement seems to be minimal on plain radiographs. CT scans could be helpful in borderline cases, or in case other fractures can be expected (eg, an occult surgical neck fracture).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, diagnostic study.

Computed tomography (CT) in the selection of treatment for root-filled maxillary molars with apical periodontitis

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to evaluate whether the use of CT facilitates agreement among endodontists in selecting treatments for root-filled maxillary molars with apical periodontitis and to assess the efficacy of CT in choosing a treatment for such teeth.

METHODS

39 root-filled maxillary molars from 34 patients with suspected apical periodontitis were independently evaluated by 4 endodontists and 1 postgraduate student (decision-makers). Treatment decisions were made based on intra-oral radiographs and a fictive clinical history. After 1-3 months, the same decision-makers repeated the examination of the same teeth but with additional information from a CT examination. Agreement between decision-makers with or without the availability of the CT results was measured with Cohen's kappa coefficient. Differences in selected treatments with or without accessibility to the CT results were plotted for the same endodontists using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The agreement in assessments among endodontists was slight or fair before the CT results were available (range: 0.081-0.535). No increase was observed after reviewing the CT results (range: 0.116-0.379). After the use of CT, the treatment plan was changed 38-76% of the time by all decision-makers, and the changes affected 57.8% of the cases in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The endodontists in this study exhibited a low degree of agreement when choosing a treatment for root-filled maxillary molars with apical periodontitis. A CT examination of the investigated teeth did not result in a significantly higher degree of agreement, and CT frequently contributed to a shift in the selected therapy.

Low back pain and associated imaging findings among HIV-infected patients referred to an HIV/palliative care clinic

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common cause of chronic pain in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. The American College of Physicians and American Pain Society guidelines for diagnostic imaging in low back pain are difficult to apply to patients with chronic illnesses like HIV who may have risk factors for cancer or compression fractures, but whether imaging all such patients for low back pain improves outcomes is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to describe patients referred to a chronic pain-focused HIV/palliative care clinic (HPCC) with back pain and their associated lumbar spine imaging findings.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients at a palliative care clinic that sees patients with HIV, most of whom have chronic pain. Charts with a diagnosis of low back pain were cross-referenced with an imaging database and any magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar spine with or without contrast were identified.

RESULTS

Seventy-six of 137 patients referred to the HPCC were found to have back pain. These patients were mainly young (median age 45, interquartile range 40-51) with well-controlled HIV. Twenty-two (29%) of these patients had an MRI of the lumbar spine, and 11 (50%) of these warranted follow-up, most of whom had degenerative disc disease, including four with findings concerning for malignancy.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study to explore the role of spinal imaging in HIV-infected patients. In our study, four patients had findings concerning for malignancy. These findings suggest that spinal imaging should be considered in the work up of HIV-infected patients with moderate to severe back pain.

Appropriate use of lumbar imaging for evaluation of low back pain

Use of lumbar spine imaging, particularly advanced imaging, continues to grow rapidly in the United States. Many lumbar spine imaging tests are obtained in patients who have no clinical symptoms or risk factors suggesting a serious underlying condition, yet evidence shows that this routine imaging is not associated with benefits, exposes patients to unnecessary harms, and increases costs. This article reviews current trends and practice patterns in lumbar spine imaging, direct and downstream costs, benefits and harms, current recommendations, and potential strategies for reducing imaging overuse.

Using patient management as a surrogate for patient health outcomes in diagnostic test evaluation

Background

Before a new test is introduced in clinical practice, evidence is needed to demonstrate that its use will lead to improvements in patient health outcomes. Studies reporting test accuracy may not be sufficient, and clinical trials of tests that measure patient health outcomes are rarely feasible. Therefore, the consequences of testing on patient management are often investigated as an intermediate step in the pathway. There is a lack of guidance on the interpretation of this evidence, and patient management studies often neglect a discussion of the limitations of measuring patient management as a surrogate for health outcomes.

Methods

We discuss the rationale for measuring patient management, describe the common study designs and provide guidance about how this evidence should be reported.

Results

Interpretation of patient management studies relies on the condition that patient management is a valid surrogate for downstream patient benefits. This condition presupposes two critical assumptions: the test improves diagnostic accuracy; and the measured changes in patient management improve patient health outcomes. The validity of this evidence depends on the certainty around these critical assumptions and the ability of the study design to minimise bias. Three common designs are test RCTs that measure patient management as a primary endpoint, diagnostic before-after studies that compare planned patient management before and after testing, and accuracy studies that are extended to report on the actual treatment or further tests received following a positive and negative test result.

Conclusions

Patient management can be measured as a surrogate outcome for test evaluation if its limitations are recognised. The potential consequences of a positive and negative test result on patient management should be pre-specified and the potential patient benefits of these management changes clearly stated. Randomised comparisons will provide higher quality evidence about differences in patient management using the new test than observational studies. Regardless of the study design used, the critical assumption that patient management is a valid surrogate for downstream patient benefits or harms must be discussed in these studies.

Imaging of lumbar degenerative disk disease: history and current state

One of the most common indications for performing magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the lumbar spine is the symptom complex thought to originate as a result of degenerative disk disease. MR imaging, which has emerged as perhaps the modality of choice for imaging degenerative disk disease, can readily demonstrate disk pathology, degenerative endplate changes, facet and ligamentous hypertrophic changes, and the sequelae of instability. Its role in terms of predicting natural history of low back pain, identifying causality, or offering prognostic information is unclear. As available modalities for imaging the spine have progressed from radiography, myelography, and computed tomography to MR imaging, there have also been advances in spine surgery for degenerative disk disease. These advances are described in a temporal context for historical purposes with a focus on MR imaging's history and current state.

Influence of nomenclature in the interpretation of lumbar disk contour on MR imaging: a comparison of the agreement using the combined task force and the nordic nomenclatures

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The CTF nomenclature had not been tested in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability and diagnostic confidence in the interpretation of disk contours on lumbar 1.5T MR imaging when using the CTF and the Nordic nomenclatures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five general radiologists from 3 hospitals blindly and independently assessed intravertebral herniations (Schmorl node) and disk contours on the lumbar MR imaging of 53 patients with low back pain, on 4 occasions. Measures were taken to minimize the risk of recall bias. The Nordic nomenclature was used for the first 2 assessments, and the CTF nomenclature, in the remaining 2. Radiologists had not previously used either of the 2 nomenclatures. κ statistics were calculated separately for reports deriving from each nomenclature and were categorized as almost perfect (0.81-1.00), substantial (0.61-0.80), moderate (0.41-0.60), fair (0.21-0.40), slight (0.00-0.20), and poor (<0.00).

RESULTS

Categorization of intra- and interobserver agreement was the same across nomenclatures. Intraobserver reliability was substantial for intravertebral herniations and disk contour abnormalities. Interobserver reliability was moderate for intravertebral herniations and fair to moderate for disk contour.

CONCLUSIONS

In conditions close to clinical practice, regardless of the specific nomenclature used, a standardized nomenclature supports only moderate interobserver agreement. The Nordic nomenclature increases self-confidence in an individual observer's report but is less clear regarding the classification of disks as normal versus bulged.

Relationship of early magnetic resonance imaging for work-related acute low back pain with disability and medical utilization outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To examine early magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) utilization for workers compensation cases with acute, disabling low back pain and further, to examine low or high propensity to undergo early MRI with disability duration, medical costs, and surgery.

METHODS

Two-year follow-up of 3264 cases. Cox regression and generalized linear models were used to examine the association between both early MRI (first 30 days postonset) and propensity of belonging to the early MRI group (estimated by demographic and severity indicators) with outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 21.7% cases had early MRI. After controlling for covariates, cases that had early MRI and simultaneously had a low propensity to undergo early MRI were more likely to have worse outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of cases had no early MRI indications. Results suggest that iatrogenic effects of early MRI are worse disability and increased medical costs and surgery, unrelated to severity.

Magnetic resonance imaging for low back pain: indications and limitations

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the preferred investigation for most spinal diseases and is increasingly requested for people with low back pain (LBP). However, determining the cause of back pain is complicated as it is often multifactorial and anatomical abnormalities are common in the spine and may not necessarily translate into clinical symptoms. Thus, national guidelines discourage the use of MRI in non-specific LBP and recommend reserving it for the investigation of severe or progressive neurological deficits or for those cases in which serious underlying pathology is suspected. It also has an acknowledged role in planning surgical management in cases of radiculopathy and spinal stenosis. This review summarises the indications for MRI in LBP and calls for improved education of patients and health professionals in the limitations of this investigation.

A meta-analysis examining clinical test utility for assessing superior labral anterior posterior lesions

BACKGROUND

The reported accuracy of clinical tests for superior labral anterior posterior lesions is extremely variable. Pooling results from multiple studies of higher quality is necessary to establish the best clinical tests to use.

HYPOTHESIS

Certain clinical tests are superior to others for diagnosing the presence or absence of a superior labral anterior posterior lesion.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE (1966-2007), CINAHL (1982-2007), and BIOSIS (1995-2007) was performed for (labrum OR labral OR SLAP OR Bankart) AND (shoulder OR shoulder joint OR glenoid) AND (specificity OR sensitivity AND specificity). Identified articles were reviewed for inclusion criteria. Sensitivity and specificity values were recorded from each study and used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six of 198 identified studies satisfied the eligibility criteria. Active compression, anterior slide, crank, and Speed tests were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curves. The accuracy of the anterior slide test was significantly inferior to that of the active compression, crank, and Speed tests. There was no significant difference in test accuracy found among active compression, crank, and Speed tests. Between studies, methodological scores did not significantly affect sensitivity and specificity values.

CONCLUSION

The anterior slide test is a poor test for detecting the presence of a labral lesion in the shoulder. Active compression, crank, and Speed tests are more optimal choices. Clinicians should choose the active compression test first, crank second, and Speed test third when a labral lesion is suspected.

Imaging strategies for low-back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Some clinicians do lumbar imaging routinely or in the absence of historical or clinical features suggestive of serious low-back problems. We investigated the effects of routine, immediate lumbar imaging versus usual clinical care without immediate imaging on clinical outcomes in patients with low-back pain and no indication of serious underlying conditions.

METHODS

We analysed randomised controlled trials that compared immediate lumbar imaging (radiography, MRI, or CT) versus usual clinical care without immediate imaging for low-back pain. These trials reported pain or function (primary outcomes), quality of life, mental health, overall patient-reported improvement (based on various scales), and patient satisfaction in care received. Six trials (n=1804) met inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed by two independent reviewers with criteria adapted from the Cochrane Back Review Group. Meta-analyses were done with a random effects model.

FINDINGS

We did not record significant differences between immediate lumbar imaging and usual care without immediate imaging for primary outcomes at either short-term (up to 3 months, standardised mean difference 0.19, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.39 for pain and 0.11, -0.29 to 0.50 for function, negative values favour routine imaging) or long-term (6-12 months, -0.04, -0.15 to 0.07 for pain and 0.01, -0.17 to 0.19 for function) follow-up. Other outcomes did not differ significantly. Trial quality, use of different imaging methods, and duration of low-back pain did not affect the results, but analyses were limited by small numbers of trials. Results are most applicable to acute or subacute low-back pain assessed in primary-care settings.

INTERPRETATION

Lumbar imaging for low-back pain without indications of serious underlying conditions does not improve clinical outcomes. Therefore, clinicians should refrain from routine, immediate lumbar imaging in patients with acute or subacute low-back pain and without features suggesting a serious underlying condition.

[Magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative staging for breast cancer: pros and contras]

In oncologic patients, staging of the disease extent is of paramount importance. Imaging studies are used to decide whether the patient is a surgical candidate; if this is the case, imaging is used for detailed planning of the surgical procedure itself. Even in patients with limited prognosis, the first priority is always to achieve clear margins. Due to the widespread use of screening mammography, breast cancers are among the few cancers that are almost always diagnosed in an operable stage and are operated on with curative intention. It is well established that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is far superior to mammography (with and without concomitant ultrasound) for mapping the local extent of breast cancer. Accordingly, there is good reason to suggest that a pre-operative breast MRI should be considered an integral part of breast conserving treatment. Still, it is only rarely used in clinical practice. Arguments against its use are: Its high costs, allegedly high number of false positive findings, lack of MR-guided breast biopsy facilities, lack of evidence from randomized prospective trials and, notably, fear of "overtreatment". This paper discusses the reservations against staging MRI and weighs them against its clinical advantages. The point is made that radiologists as well as breast surgeons should be aware of the possibility of overtreatment, i.e. unnecessary mastectomy for very small, "MRI-only" multicentric cancer foci that would indeed be sufficiently treated by radiation therapy. There is a clear need to adapt the guidelines established for treatment of mammography-diagnosed multicentric breast cancer to account for the additional use of MRI for staging. Until these guidelines are available, the management of additional, "MRI-only" diagnosed small multicentric cancer manifestations must be decided on wisely and with caution. MRI for staging may only be done in institutions that can also offer an MR-guided tissue sampling, preferably by MR-guided vacuum assisted biopsy, to provide pre-operative histological proof of lesions visible by breast MRI alone.

Current Status of Breast MR Imaging Part 2. Clinical Applications

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is emerging as the most sensitive modality that is currently available for the detection of primary or recurrent breast cancer. Although this technique has been shown to be an extremely powerful diagnostic tool, it is still relatively rarely used in clinical practice, as compared with other applications of MR imaging such as for musculoskeletal or brain and spine imaging. This is the second of a two-part series on the current status of breast MR. Part two provides an overview of the use of breast MR imaging in clinical patient care, the body of evidence that supports its use. A discussion is provided on the many controversies that exist regarding breast MR imaging for preoperative staging and for screening.

Radiological examination in low back pain patients: Anxiety of the patient? Anxiety of the therapist?

A review of the recent literature shows that guidelines on the management of low back pain (LBP) have little impact on the use of radiological imagery. Among the factors which might account for the use of radiological examination, a review of the literature points to some that refer to the patient, others to the clinician and still others to the therapeutic interaction. This leads one to question the importance of radiological examination for both the patient and the physician. The matter at stake in this review is the relationship that may exist between this type of examination and the patient's and/or the physician's anxiety. If these aspects are associated or causally related, this relationship can be two-sided and is thus susceptible to affect the patient, the physician, or both. Some possible keys which emphasize the central role of the therapeutic relationship in this predicament are also reviewed.

Assessing diagnostic accuracy and the clinical value of positron emission tomography imaging in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules (SNAP)

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic tests, particularly diagnostic imaging modalities such as computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET), have the potential to make important contributions to improved patient care and medical decision making. The expense of these tests is justified to the extent that they improve diagnostic and treatment decisions, and ultimately health outcomes. Clinical studies evaluating the accuracy of diagnostic tests and assessing their influence on decision making are essential to setting health policy and directing patient care.

PURPOSE

We present the design and participant baseline characteristics of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study 027 (Prospective Study of the Diagnostic Accuracy of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) - Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Imaging in the Management of Patients with Solitary Pulmonary Nodules (SNAP).

METHODS

SNAP is a prospective, multi-site diagnostic trial to evaluate the efficacy of PET and CT for characterizing solitary pulmonary nodules. The study incorporated an assessment of the impact of these imaging modalities on clinical decision making.

RESULTS

Between January 1999 and June 2001, 10 SNAP sites enrolled 532 participants with a mean age of 66 years (SD +/- 11.3), of whom 97.3% were male. A history of smoking was claimed by 93.6% of participants, with 45.7% of all participants smoking at time of enrollment. Those still smoking had an average exposure of 56.8 pack-years, while those who had quit smoking prior to enrollment had an exposure of 58.1 pack-years.

LIMITATIONS

The study design reduced most common biases, but some degree of selection bias and verification bias remained. We sought to minimize verification bias by use of a dual reference standard.

CONCLUSION

SNAP is a diagnostic test study that was designed to minimize bias and to assess a test's impact on clinical decision making, providing the kind of information most needed by clinicians and health policy makers.

Imaging for whom: patient or physician?

OBJECTIVE

Radiologic imaging examinations are being ordered beyond the margin of medical necessity. Radiologists can assess the value of imaging in a variety of clinical situations by gathering data regarding test ordering patterns and their effects on patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Emerging information technologies have the potential to facilitate the collection of data and permit the dissemination of appropriate guidelines to limit the number of unnecessary and possibly harmful examinations.

[Feasibilities and bounds of diagnostic radiology in case of back pain]

Chronic monotone back pain is no pressing indication for radiographic procedures, but chronic progressive or symptomatic back pain should be investigated by radiographic means. Beneath conventional radiology and computed tomography (CT) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become a more method of standard in these cases. The radiographic investigation of back pain is shown in cases of discal and vertebral degeneration and spondylitis. Typical signs and differential diagnosis are demonstrated. After demonstration of radiological means. After introduction and valuation of radiological means, as conventional radiography, CT, MRI, myelography and scintigraphy, it is entered into degenerative changes and degenerative diseases of vertebra endplates and vertebra bodies as a reason of pain. Reasons of spinal stenosis are discussed. In case of inflammatory changes, bacterial inflammation of vertebrae and intervertebral joints are represented. Changes of spondylodiscitis/spondylitis are opposed to inflammatory changes of Morbus Bechterew and Morbus Scheuermann.

Imaging of disk disease and degenerative spondylosis of the lumbar spine

Low back pain is a common but poorly understood entity. Features of degeneration depend on which component of the motion segment is predominantly affected, and include disk space narrowing, vacuum phenomenon, disk desiccation, vertebral osteophyte formation, disk herniation, and facet arthrosis, but these features do not necessarily have any relationship to symptoms. Since most episodes of back pain resolve on their own, and most disk herniations spontaneously regress, imaging of low back pain, although widely performed, is probably not necessary in most cases.

Peripheral arterial disease: therapeutic confidence of CT versus digital subtraction angiography and effects on additional imaging recommendations

PURPOSE

To compare multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) prior to revascularization in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease for the purpose of assessing recommendations for additional imaging and physician confidence ratings for chosen therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial, 73 patients were assigned to CT angiography, and 72 were assigned to DSA. Physician confidence in the treatment decision was measured as a continuous outcome on a scale of 0-10 (uncertain to certain) and as a dichotomous outcome (further imaging recommended, yes or no). Mean confidence scores and additional imaging recommendations were compared between CT and DSA groups in an intention-to-diagnose-and-treat analysis. To detect trends in confidence, confidence scores were plotted over time, and multiple linear regression analysis was performed. To detect trends in additional imaging recommendations, logistic regression analysis was used. Data from eligible nonrandomized patients were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics between randomized groups was found. CT had a lower confidence score than did DSA (7.2 vs 8.2, P < .001). Further imaging was recommended more often after CT (25 of 71 patients, 35%) than after DSA (nine of 66 patients, 14%; P = .003). Analysis of trends demonstrated increasing (but not statistically significant) confidence in CT and stable confidence in DSA. No significant difference was found in baseline characteristics between randomized and nonrandomized patients. Among nonrandomized patients, no significant difference in mean confidence score (8.2 vs 8.3, P = .26) was found between CT (n = 24) and DSA (n = 26).

CONCLUSION

With CT angiography, physician confidence decreases with an associated increase in additional imaging prior to revascularization in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Given that CT is less invasive than DSA, results suggest that CT may replace DSA in selected cases.

Low back pain: influence of early MR imaging or CT on treatment and outcome--multicenter randomized trial

PURPOSE

To establish whether early use of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging or computed tomography (CT) influences treatment and outcome of patients with low back pain (LBP) and whether it is cost-effective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a multicenter randomized study, two imaging policies for LBP were compared in 782 participants with symptomatic lumbar spine disorders who were referred to orthopedists or neurosurgeons. Participants were randomly allocated to early (393 participants; mean age, 43.9 years; range, 16-82 years) or delayed selective (389 participants; mean age, 42.8 years; range, 14-82 years) imaging groups. Delayed selective imaging referred to imaging restricted to patients in whom a clear clinical need subsequently developed. Main outcome measures were Aberdeen Low Back Pain (ALBP) score, Short Form 36 (SF-36) score (for multidimensional health status), EuroQol (EQ-5D) score (for quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] estimates), and healthcare resource use at 8 and 24 months after randomization. Data were evaluated with analysis of covariance, ordinal logistic regression analysis, and chi(2) and Mann-Whitney tests.

RESULTS

Both groups showed improvement in ALBP score, but this was greater in the early group (adjusted mean difference between groups, -3.05 points [95% CI: -5.16, -0.95; P =.005] and -3.62 points [95% CI: -5.92, -1.32; P =.002] at 8 and 24 months, respectively). Scores for SF-36 (bodily pain domain) and EQ-5D were also significantly better at 24 months. Clinical treatment was similar in both groups. Differences in total costs reflected cost of imaging. Imaging provided an adjusted mean additional QALY of 0.041 during 24 months at a mean incremental cost per QALY of $2,124.

CONCLUSION

Early use of imaging does not appear to affect treatment overall. Decisions about the use of imaging depend on judgments concerning whether the small observed improvement in outcome justifies additional cost.

Evidence against the use of lumbar spine radiography for low back pain

AIM

To review abnormalities reported on plain radiographic examination of the lumbar spine in patients referred with low back pain by general practitioners. Additionally, we evaluated and stratified the prevalence of these abnormalities by age. Finally, the diagnostic impact of lumbar spine radiography for the diagnosis of degenerative change, fracture, infection and possible tumour, was modelled.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of 2007 radiographic reports of patients referred with low back pain for lumbar spine radiography to a large radiology department was performed. The reports were classified into different diagnostic groups and subsequently stratified according to age. The potential diagnostic impact of lumbar spine radiography was modelled by using the prevalence of conditions studied as pre-test probabilities of disease.

RESULTS

The prevalence of reported lumbar spine degeneration increased with age to 71% in patients aged 65-74 years. The overall prevalence of fracture, possible infection, possible tumour was low in our study population: 4, 0.8 and 0.7%, respectively. Fracture and possible infection showed no association with age. Possible tumour was only reported in patients older than 55 years of age.

CONCLUSION

Although the prevalence of degenerative changes was high in older patients, the therapeutic consequences of diagnosing this abnormality are minor. The prevalence of possible serious conditions was very low in all age categories, which implies radiation exposure in many patients with no significant lesions.

Purification and properties of liver fructose 1,6-bisphosphatase from C57BL/KsJ normal and diabetic mice

PURPOSE

To prospectively compare therapeutic confidence in, patient outcomes (in terms of quality of life) after, and the costs of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) with those of multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography as the initial diagnostic imaging test in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional medical ethics committee approval and patient informed consent were obtained. Between April 2000 and August 2001, patients with PAD were randomly assigned to undergo either DSA or multi-detector row CT angiography as the initial diagnostic imaging test. Outcomes were the therapeutic confidence assessed by physicians (on a scale from 0 to 10), the need for additional imaging, the health-related quality of life at 6-month follow-up, diagnostic and therapeutic costs, and the costs for a hospital stay. Costs were computed from a hospital perspective according to Dutch guidelines for cost calculations in health care. Mean outcomes were compared between groups with unpaired t testing and were adjusted for predictive baseline characteristics with multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 145 patients, 72 were randomly allocated to the DSA group and 73 to the CT angiography group. One patient in the DSA group had to be excluded. Mean age was 63 years in the DSA group and 64 years in the CT angiography group. There were 47 men in the DSA group and 58 men in the CT angiography group. Physician confidence in making a correct therapeutic choice was significantly higher at DSA (mean confidence score, 8.2) than at CT angiography (mean score, 7.2; P < .001). During 6-month follow-up, 14% less additional imaging was performed in the DSA group than in the CT angiography group (P = .3). No significant quality-of-life differences were found between groups. The diagnostic cost associated with DSA (564 +/- 210 euro [standard deviation]) was significantly higher than that associated with CT angiography (363 +/- 273 euro), a difference of -201 euro (95% confidence interval: -281 euro, -120 euro; P < .001). Therapeutic and hospitalization costs were similar for both strategies.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that use of noninvasive multi-detector row CT angiography instead of DSA as the initial diagnostic imaging test for PAD provides sufficient information for therapeutic decision making and reduces imaging costs.