Multivariate analyses of MRI findings for predicting osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetic patients

Is fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous bone biopsy of diabetic foot with suspected osteomyelitis worthwhile? A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot infection, particularly osteomyelitis, is a major risk factor of amputation in persons with diabetes. Bone biopsy with microbial examination is considered the gold standard of diagnosis of osteomyelitis, providing information about the offending pathogens as well as their antibiotics susceptibility. This allows targeting of these pathogens with narrow spectrum antibiotics, potentially reducing emergence of antimicrobial resistance. Percutaneous fluoroscopy guided bone biopsy allows accurate and safe targeting of the affected bone.

METHODS

In a single tertiary medical institution and over 9 year period, we performed 170 percutaneous bone biopsies. We retrosepctively reviewed the medical record of these patients including patients' demographics, imaging and biopsy microbiology and pathollogic results.

RESULTS

Microbiological cultures of 80 samples (47.1%) were positive with 53.8% of the positive culture showed monomicrobial growth and the remaining were polymicrobial. Of the positive bone samples 71.3% grew Gram-positive bacteria. Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently isolated pathogen from positive bone cultures with almost one third showing methicillin resistence. Enterococcus species were the most frequently isolated pathogens from polymicrobial samples. Enterobacteriaceae species were the most common Gram-negative pathogens and were more common in polymicrobial samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous image-guided bone biopsy is a low-risk, minimally invasive procedure that can provide valuable information about microbial pathogens and therefore enable targeting these pathogens with narrow spectrum antibiotics.

Osteomyelitis of the Lower Limb: Diagnostic Accuracy of Dual-Energy CT versus MRI

BACKGROUND

MRI is the preferred imaging technique for the identification of osteomyelitis. The key element for diagnosis is the presence of bone marrow edema (BME). Dual-energy CT (DECT) is an alternative tool which is able to identify BME in the lower limb.

PURPOSE

To compare the diagnostic performance of DECT and MRI for osteomyelitis, using clinical, microbiological, and imaging data as reference standards.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective single-center study enrolled consecutive patients with suspected bone infections undergoing DECT and MRI imaging from December 2020 to June 2022. Four blinded radiologists with various experience levels (range of 3-21 years) evaluated the imaging findings. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed in the presence of BMEs, abscesses, sinus tracts, bone reabsorption, or gaseous elements. The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values of each method were determined and compared using a multi-reader multi-case analysis. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

In total, 44 study participants (mean age 62.5 years ± 16.5 [SD], 32 men) were evaluated. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed in 32 participants. For the MRI, the mean sensitivity and specificity were 89.1% and 87.5%, while for the DECT they were 89.0% and 72.9%, respectively. The DECT demonstrated a good diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.88), compared with the MRI (AUC = 0.92) (p = 0.12). When considering each imaging finding alone, the best accuracy was achieved by considering BME (AUC for DECT 0.85 versus AUC of MRI of 0.93, with p = 0.07), followed by the presence of bone erosions (AUC 0.77 for DECT and 0.53 for MRI, with p = 0.02). The inter-reader agreement of the DECT (k = 88) was similar to that of the MRI (k = 90).

CONCLUSION

Dual-energy CT demonstrated a good diagnostic performance in detecting osteomyelitis.

Outcomes in patients with clinically suspected pedal osteomyelitis based on bone marrow signal pattern on MRI

Objective: confluent T1 hypointense marrow signal is widely accepted to represent osteomyelitis on MRI. Some authors have suggested that non-confluent bone marrow signal abnormality should be considered early osteomyelitis. The purpose of this study was to address this issue by comparing the rate of osteomyelitis and amputation based on T1 marrow signal characteristics. Materials and methods: a total of 112 patients who underwent MRI of the foot for the evaluation of possible osteomyelitis were included. Patients were assigned to confluent T1 hypointense, reticulated T1 hypointense, and normal bone marrow signal groups. Results: patients with confluent T1 hypointense signal on MRI had significantly higher rates of osteomyelitis and amputation at 2 and 14 months post-MRI than the reticulated T1 hypointense group ( p < 0.001 ). Six patients had normal T1 signal, 16.7 % of whom had osteomyelitis and underwent amputation by 2 months post-MRI. Of 61 patients with reticulated T1 hypointense signal, 19.7 % had a diagnosis of osteomyelitis at 2 months post-MRI and 30.8 % had a diagnosis of osteomyelitis at 14 months post-MRI; moreover, 14.8 % and 31.5 % underwent amputation by 2 and 14 months post-MRI, respectively. Of 45 patients with confluent T1 hypointense signal, 73.3 % of patients had osteomyelitis at 2 months post-MRI and 82.5 % had osteomyelitis at 14 months post-MRI. In this group, 66.7 % underwent amputation by 2 months post-MRI and 77.8 % underwent amputation by 14 months post-MRI. Conclusions: over half of the patients with suspected pedal osteomyelitis who had reticulated or normal T1 bone marrow signal on MRI healed with conservative measures. Therefore, we recommend terminology such as "osteitis", "reactive osteitis", or "nonspecific reactive change" to describe bone marrow edema-like signal and reticulated hazy T1 hypointense signal without associated confluent T1 hypointensity. Moreover, we recommend that the MRI diagnosis of osteomyelitis is reserved for confluent T1 hypointense bone signal in the area of concern.

Pathogen-specific molecular imaging and molecular testing methods in the prognosis of the complicated course of diabetic foot syndrome, the risk of amputation, and patient survival

The aim of this review was to provide extended information on current trends in the diagnosis of complicated diabetic foot syndrome (DFS), the most frequent and severe complication of diabetes mellitus, including hightech medical imaging methods and instrumental and laboratory predictors of the complicated course and risk of amputation in DFS.

The article provides an analytical review of modern publications over the past 5 years on diagnosis and therapy. Pilot data on the use of high-tech medical imaging methods, assessment of skin microbiota and ulcers in DFS, molecular testing methods in terms of predicting the amputation risk and survival of patients with DFS, as well as the effectiveness of biosensing systems have been systematized, summarized, and subjected to analytical evaluation.

The review provides an expert assessment of the capabilities of pathogen-specific molecular imaging using modern positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and highenergy radionuclides in bacterial infection to understand its pathogenesis, minimize diagnostic problems, improve antimicrobial treatment, and address fundamental and applied aspects of DFS. Literature data on the assessment of foot perfusion in diabetic patients with varying degrees of limb ischemia by hybrid technologies (SPECT / CT and PET / CT) and new modalities of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are also systematized, which contributes to new understanding of the response to revascularization, surgical shunting, and stimulation of angiogenesis within ischemic tissue, as well as potentially to healing of foot ulcers.

The review is aimed at substantiating a multidisciplinary approach in DFS, selection, development, and implementation of innovative strategies for diagnostic modalities to identify diabetic foot pathologies, and choice of an adequate method for treating and monitoring the results of therapy in the context of personalized medicine.

Classification Model for Diabetic Foot, Necrotizing Fasciitis, and Osteomyelitis

Simple Summary

Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) and osteomyelitis (OM) are severe complications in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Although NF and OM often cause results including limb amputation and death, definite diagnoses of these are challenging. To aid the prompt and proper diagnosis of NF and OM in patients with DFU, we developed and evaluated a novel prediction model based on machine learning technology. In summary, our prediction model appropriately discriminated the NF and OM from diabetic foot. Moreover, this prediction model has advantages in that it is based on the demographic data and routine laboratory results, which requires no additional examinations which are complicated or expensive.

Abstract

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and their life-threatening complications, such as necrotizing fasciitis (NF) and osteomyelitis (OM), increase the healthcare cost, morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus. While the early recognition of these complications could improve the clinical outcome of diabetic patients, it is not straightforward to achieve in the usual clinical settings. In this study, we proposed a classification model for diabetic foot, NF and OM. To select features for the classification model, multidisciplinary teams were organized and data were collected based on a literature search and automatic platform. A dataset of 1581 patients (728 diabetic foot, 76 NF, and 777 OM) was divided into training and validation datasets at a ratio of 7:3 to be analyzed. The final prediction models based on training dataset exhibited areas under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of the 0.80 and 0.73 for NF model and OM model, respectively, in validation sets. In conclusion, our classification models for NF and OM showed remarkable discriminatory power and easy applicability in patients with DFU.

Foot Osteomyelitis Location and Rates of Primary or Secondary Major Amputations in Patients With Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) often leads to amputations in the lower extremity. Data on the influence of the initial anatomical DFO localization on ultimate major amputation are limited.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, 583 amputation episodes in 344 patients (78 females, 266 males) were analyzed. All received a form of amputation in combination with antibiotic therapy. A multivariate logistic regression analysis with the primary outcome "major amputation" defined as an amputation above the ankle joint was performed. The association of risk factors including location of DFO, coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, neuropathy, nephropathy, and Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy was analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 583 episodes, DFO was located in the forefoot in 512 (87.8%), in the midfoot in 43 (7.4%), and in the hindfoot in 28 episodes (4.8%). Overall, 53 of 63 (84.1%) major amputations were performed because of DFO in the setting of peripheral artery disease as primary indication. Overall, limb loss occurred in 6.1% (31/512) of forefoot, 20.9% (9/43) of midfoot, and 46.4% (13/28) of hindfoot DFO. Among these, 22 (41.5%) were performed as the primary treatment, whereas 31 (58.5%) followed previously failed minor amputations. Among this latter group of secondary major amputations, the DFO was localized to the forefoot in 23 of 583 (3.9%), the midfoot in 4 of 583 (0.7%) and the hindfoot in 4 of 583 (0.7%). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, initial hindfoot localization was a significant factor (P < .05), whereas peripheral artery disease, smoking, and a midfoot DFO were not found to be risk factors.

CONCLUSION

In our retrospective series, the frequency of limb loss in DFO increased with more proximal initial foot DFO lesions, with almost half of patients losing their limbs with a hindfoot DFO.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Systematic review: investigating the added diagnostic value of gadolinium contrast agents for osteomyelitis in the appendicular skeleton

OBJECTIVE

Osteomyelitis is an infection of the bone marrow. MRI with gadolinium-based contrast is frequently performed for cases of suspected osteomyelitis. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced vs non-contrast-enhanced MRI for osteomyelitis in the appendicular skeleton.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of MRI in the diagnosis of osteomyelitis by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 2000 to March 2020. There were 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review for a total of 1095 patients. Analytic methods were based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Evidence was evaluated using the STARD criteria for evaluation of completeness and transparency of reporting.

RESULTS

For diagnosing osteomyelitis in the appendicular skeleton, MRI with gadolinium-based contrast has 89% sensitivity (95% CI, 86-92%), 79% specificity (95% CI, 75-83%), and 90% overall diagnostic accuracy ([SE] = 0.03). For diagnosing osteomyelitis in the appendicular skeleton, MRI without gadolinium-based contrast has a 92% sensitivity (95% CI, 87-96%), 89% specificity (95% CI, 84-93%), and 96% overall diagnostic accuracy ([SE] = 0.03). The median score of included studies was 85% utilizing the STARD criteria with excellent interobserver agreement of 83.4%. Limitations included small sample size of studies, with retrospective designs.

CONCLUSION

No evidence was found to suggest an added diagnostic value of gadolinium contrast for the diagnosis of osteomyelitis in the appendicular skeleton. For routine cases of suspected non-spinal osteomyelitis, non-contrast MRI of the area of interest is the next most appropriate study after radiographs.

The development of musculoskeletal radiology for 100 years as presented in the pages of Acta Radiologica

During the last 100 years, musculoskeletal radiology has developed from bone-only radiography performed by everyone to a dedicated subspecialty, still secure in its origins in radiography but having expanded into all modalities of imaging. Like other subspecialties in radiology, it has become heavily dependent on cross-sectional and functional imaging, and musculoskeletal interventions play an important role in tumor diagnosis and treatment and in joint diseases. All these developments are reflected in the pages in Acta Radiologica, as shown in this review.