MRI of the diabetic foot: differentiation of infection from neuropathic change

Preclinical Positron Emission Tomography (PET) of Prosthetic Joint Infection Using a Nitro-Prodrug of 2-[18F]F-p-Aminobenzoic Acid ([18F]F-PABA)

Deep-seated bacterial infections are difficult to detect and diagnose due to the lack of specific clinical imaging modalities. Therefore, the bacteria-specific positron emission tomography radiotracer 2-[18F]fluoro-4-nitrobenzoic acid ([18F]FNB) was developed, which is reduced to 2-[18F]fluoro-4-aminobenzoic acid ([18F]F-PABA) by bacterial nitroreductases and has improved pharmacokinetics compared to the parent compound. PET imaging demonstrated that the uptake of 2-[18F]fluoro-4-nitrobenzoic acid in a clinically relevant Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infection model was up to ∼4-fold higher in the infected joint compared to the contralateral joint. 2-[18F]Fluoro-4-nitrobenzoic acid was also able to distinguish infection from inflammation in a surgical inflammation model. Based on the mouse radiation dosimetry results, the calculated effective dose of 2-[18F]fluoro-4-nitrobenzoic acid was well below the whole-body radiation dose limit established by the Food and Drug Administration for humans. In addition, no treatment-related microscopic changes in organ histopathology were observed in a mouse acute toxicity study. Overall, these data suggest that 2-[18F]fluoro-4-nitrobenzoic acid is a specific and effective imaging agent for noninvasively diagnosing prosthetic joint infections.

Musculoskeletal infections through direct inoculation

Musculoskeletal infections consist of different clinical conditions that are commonly encountered in daily clinical settings. As clinical findings and even laboratory tests cannot always be specific, imaging plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and treatment of these cases. Musculoskeletal infections most commonly occur secondary to direct inoculation into the skin involuntarily affected by trauma, microorganism, foreign bodies, or in diabetic ulcers; direct infections can also occur from voluntary causes due to surgery, vaccinations, or other iatrogenic procedures. Hematogenous spread of infection from a remote focus can also be a cause for musculoskeletal infections. Risk factors for soft tissue and bone infections include immunosuppression, old age, corticosteroid use, systemic illnesses, malnutrition, obesity, and burns. Most literature discusses musculoskeletal infections according to the diagnostic tools or forms of infection seen in different soft tissue anatomical planes or bones. This review article aims to evaluate musculoskeletal infections that occur due to direct inoculation to the musculoskeletal tissues, by focusing on the traumatic mechanism with emphasis on the radiological findings.

Imaging of lower extremity infections: predisposing conditions, atypical infections, mimics, and differentiating features

Imaging evaluation for lower extremity infections can be complicated, especially in the setting of underlying conditions and with atypical infections. Predisposing conditions are discussed, including diabetes mellitus, peripheral arterial disease, neuropathic arthropathy, and intravenous drug abuse, as well as differentiating features of infectious versus non-infectious disease. Atypical infections such as viral, mycobacterial, fungal, and parasitic infections and their imaging features are also reviewed. Potential mimics of lower extremity infection including chronic nonbacterial osteomyelitis, foreign body granuloma, gout, inflammatory arthropathies, lymphedema, and Morel-Lavallée lesions, and their differentiating features are also explored.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging and 99Tc WBC-SPECT/CT Scanning in Differential Diagnosis between Osteomyelitis and Charcot Neuroarthropathy: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Distinguishing between Charcot Neuroarthropathy (CN), osteomyelitis (OM), and CN complicated with superimposed OM in diabetic patients is crucial for the treatment choice. Given that current diagnostic methods lack specificity, advanced techniques, e.g., magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 99mTc-HMPAO-WBC Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT/CT), are needed. This study addresses the challenges in distinguishing OM and CN.

METHODS

We included diabetic patients with CN and soft tissue ulceration. MRI and 99mTc-HMPAO-WBC SPECT/CT were used for the diagnosis. The patients were classified into three probability levels for OM (i.e., Definite, Probable, and Unlikely) according to the Consensus Criteria for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis (CC-DFO).

RESULTS

Eight patients met the eligibility criteria. MRI, supported by SPECT-CT and CC-DFO, showed consistency with the OM diagnosis in three cases. The key diagnostic features included the location of signal abnormalities and secondary features such as skin ulcers, sinus tracts, and abscesses. Notably, cases with inconclusive MRI were clarified by SPECT/CT, emphasizing its efficacy in challenging scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary objective of this study was to compare the results of MRI and 99mTc-HMPAO-WBC SPECT/CT with the CC-DFO score in the diabetic foot with CN and suspected OM. Advanced imaging offers a complementary approach to distinguish between CN and OM. This can help delineate the limits of the disease for presurgical planning. While MRI is valuable, 99mTc-HMPAO-WBC SPECT/CT provides additional clarity, especially in challenging cases or when metallic implants affect MRI accuracy.

State-of-the-art update for diagnosing diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a narrative review

Recently, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot and the Infectious Diseases Society of America divided diabetic foot disease into diabetic foot infection (DFI) and diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). DFI is usually diagnosed clinically, while numerous methods exist to diagnose DFO. In this narrative review, the authors aim to summarize the updated data on the diagnosis of DFO. An extensive literature search using "diabetic foot [MeSH]" and "osteomyelitis [MeSH]" or "diagnosis" was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar in July 2023. The possibility of DFO is based on inflammatory clinical signs, including the probe-to-bone (PTB) test. Elevated inflammatory biochemical markers, especially erythrocyte sedimentation rate, are beneficial. Distinguishing abnormal findings of plain radiographs is also a first-line approach. Moreover, sophisticated modalities, including magnetic resonance imaging and nuclear medicine imaging, are helpful if doubt remains after a first-line diagnosis. Transcutaneous bone biopsy, which does not pass through the wound, is necessary to avoid contaminating the sample. This review focuses on the current diagnostic techniques for DFOs with an emphasis on the updates. To obtain the correct therapeutic results, selecting a proper option is necessary. Based on these numerous diagnosis modalities and indications, the proper choice of diagnostic tool can have favorable treatment outcomes.

Charcot Arthropathy of the Digit: A Report of 2 Cases

CASE

Charcot arthropathy (CA) is a progressive degenerative joint disease typically affecting lower extremity weight-bearing joints, with only a few cases reported in the fingers. We present 2 cases of interphalangeal joint CA: the long finger distal interphalangeal joint in a 73-year-old man with severe carpal tunnel syndrome and the ring finger proximal interphalangeal joint of a 71-year-old woman with diabetic neuropathy.

CONCLUSION

Two cases of CA of the digits were treated with splinting with resolution of symptoms and no wound complications.

A Rare Charcot Neuro-Osteoarthropathy of Hip with an Uncommon Cause

Neuro-osteoarthropathy often called as Charcot joint results from decreased sensory innervations of the involved joint resulting in severely damaged and disrupted joints and involvement of adjacent soft tissues. Charcot joint is characterized by the “6Ds,” which are i) distended joints, ii) density increase, iii) debris production, iv) dislocation, v) disorganization, and vi) destruction. Hip joint involvement is very rare probably because of rich nerve supply compared with other peripheral joints. To minimize the joint deformity and loss of function, early diagnosis is of great importance in which radiological imaging plays a major role.

Presurgical Perspective and Postsurgical Evaluation of the Diabetic Foot

Management of the diabetic foot is complex and challenging, requiring a multidisciplinary approach. Imaging plays an important role in the decision-making process regarding surgery. This article discusses the presurgical perspective and postsurgical evaluation of the diabetic foot.

Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Distinguishes Between Osteomyelitis, Bone Marrow Edema, and Healthy Bone on Forefoot Magnetic Resonance Imaging

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of osteomyelitis by imaging can be challenging. The feasibility of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) as ancillary sequence was evaluated in this study.

PURPOSE

To evaluate DWI for differentiation between osteomyelitis, bone marrow edema, and healthy bone on forefoot magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

STUDY TYPE

Prospective.

SUBJECTS

A total of 60 consecutive patients undergoing forefoot MRI divided into three study groups (20 subjects each): osteomyelitis, bone marrow edema, and healthy bone.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

A 1.5T and 3T MRI scanners; readout-segmented multishot echo planar DWI.

ASSESSMENT

Two independent radiologists measured apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values within abnormal or healthy bone.

STATISTICAL TESTS

ADC values were compared between groups (pairwise t-test with Bonferroni-Holm correction for multiple testing). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess inter-reader agreement. Threshold ADC values were determined as the cutoffs that maximized the sum of sensitivity and specificity. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed with statistical threshold of P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Inter-reader agreement was 0.92 in the healthy bone group and 0.78 in both the edema and osteomyelitis groups. Average ADC values were significantly different between groups: 1432 ± 222 × 10^-6  mm² /sec (osteomyelitis), 1071 ± 196 × 10^-6  mm² /sec (bone marrow edema), and 277 ± 89 × 10^-6  mm² /sec (healthy bone). A threshold ADC value of 534 × 10^-6  mm² /sec distinguishes between healthy and abnormal bone with specificity and sensitivity of 100% each. For distinction between osteomyelitis and bone marrow edema, two cutoff values were determined: a 95%-specificity cutoff indicating osteomyelitis (>1320 × 10^-6  mm² /sec) and a 95%-sensitivity cutoff indicating bone marrow edema (<1155 × 10^-6  mm² /sec). Diagnostic accuracy of 95% was achieved for 73% (29/40) of the subjects.

DATA CONCLUSION

DWI with ADC maps distinguishes between healthy and abnormal bone on forefoot MRI. Calculated cutoff values allow confirmation or exclusion of osteomyelitis in a high proportion of subjects.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

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.

Pathophysiology and Molecular Imaging of Diabetic Foot Infections

Diabetic foot infection is the leading cause of non-traumatic lower limb amputations worldwide. In addition, diabetes mellitus and sequela of the disease are increasing in prevalence. In 2017, 9.4% of Americans were diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM). The growing pervasiveness and financial implications of diabetic foot infection (DFI) indicate an acute need for improved clinical assessment and treatment. Complex pathophysiology and suboptimal specificity of current non-invasive imaging modalities have made diagnosis and treatment response challenging. Current anatomical and molecular clinical imaging strategies have mainly targeted the host's immune responses rather than the unique metabolism of the invading microorganism. Advances in imaging have the potential to reduce the impact of these problems and improve the assessment of DFI, particularly in distinguishing infection of soft tissue alone from osteomyelitis (OM). This review presents a summary of the known pathophysiology of DFI, the molecular basis of current and emerging diagnostic imaging techniques, and the mechanistic links of these imaging techniques to the pathophysiology of diabetic foot infections.

Pathophysiology and Molecular Imaging of Diabetic Foot Infections

Diabetic foot infection is the leading cause of non-traumatic lower limb amputations worldwide. In addition, diabetes mellitus and sequela of the disease are increasing in prevalence. In 2017, 9.4% of Americans were diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM). The growing pervasiveness and financial implications of diabetic foot infection (DFI) indicate an acute need for improved clinical assessment and treatment. Complex pathophysiology and suboptimal specificity of current non-invasive imaging modalities have made diagnosis and treatment response challenging. Current anatomical and molecular clinical imaging strategies have mainly targeted the host's immune responses rather than the unique metabolism of the invading microorganism. Advances in imaging have the potential to reduce the impact of these problems and improve the assessment of DFI, particularly in distinguishing infection of soft tissue alone from osteomyelitis (OM). This review presents a summary of the known pathophysiology of DFI, the molecular basis of current and emerging diagnostic imaging techniques, and the mechanistic links of these imaging techniques to the pathophysiology of diabetic foot infections.

Update on functional imaging in the evaluation of diabetic foot infection

Diabetic foot infection is a preventable complication of diabetes mellitus. It is an essential component of diabetic foot disease, which is characterised by a triad of neuropathy, ischaemia and infection. These factors may lead to foot ulceration, sepsis and amputation resulting in increased morbidity and poor quality of life. Confirming or excluding infection can be difficult especially when routine laboratory tests and plain radiographs are inconclusive. Early diagnosis and localization of diabetic foot infection is extremely important to institute timely, appropriate therapy. Structural imaging using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging all have individual applications towards the diagnostic workup of this condition but have their own limitations. Scintigraphic detection is based on physiochemical changes and hence provides a functional evaluation of bone pathology. We describe the evolution of functional nuclear medicine imaging including immunoscintigraphy in diabetic foot infection and highlight current applications of physiological 18-Fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18-FDG-PET) and computed tomography (18-FDG-PET/CT) in such patients. 18-FDG-PET/CT is a promising modality for imaging diabetic foot infection. Future studies will allow standardisation of technological details and options of 18-FDG-PET/CT interpretation in diabetic foot infection.

Diabetic Foot Infections: The Diagnostic Challenges

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are severe complications of long-standing diabetes, and they represent a diagnostic challenge, since the differentiation between osteomyelitis (OM), soft tissue infection (STI), and Charcot’s osteoarthropathy is very difficult to achieve. Nevertheless, such differential diagnosis is mandatory in order to plan the most appropriate treatment for the patient. The isolation of the pathogen from bone or soft tissues is still the gold standard for diagnosis; however, it would be desirable to have a non-invasive test that is able to detect, localize, and evaluate the extent of the infection with high accuracy. A multidisciplinary approach is the key for the correct management of diabetic patients dealing with infective complications, but at the moment, no definite diagnostic flow charts still exist. This review aims at providing an overview on multimodality imaging for the diagnosis of DFI and to address evidence-based answers to the clinicians when they appeal to radiologists or nuclear medicine (NM) physicians for studying their patients.

Comparison of White Blood Cell Scintigraphy, FDG PET/CT and MRI in Suspected Diabetic Foot Infection: Results of a Large Retrospective Multicenter Study

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) represent one of the most frequent and disabling morbidities of longstanding diabetes; therefore, early diagnosis is mandatory. The aim of this multicenter retrospective study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of white blood cell scintigraphy (WBC), ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((¹⁸F) FDG PET/CT), and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in patients with suspected DFI. Images and clinical data from 251 patients enrolled by five centers were collected in order to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of WBC, FDG, and MRI in diagnosing osteomyelitis (OM), soft-tissue infection (STI), and Charcot osteoarthropathy. In OM, WBC acquired following the European Society of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) guidelines was more specific and accurate than MRI (91.9% vs. 70.7%, p < 0.0001 and 86.2% vs. 67.1%, p = 0.003, respectively). In STI, both FDG and WBC achieved a significantly higher specificity than MRI (97.9% and 95.7% vs. 83.6%, p = 0.04 and p = 0.018, respectively). In Charcot, both MRI and WBC demonstrated a significantly higher specificity and accuracy than FDG (88.2% and 89.3% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.0009; 80.3% and 87.9% vs. 62.1%, p < 0.02, respectively). Moreover, in Charcot, WBC was more specific than MRI (89.3% vs. 88.2% p < 0.0001). Given the limitations of a retrospective study, WBC using EANM guidelines was shown to be the most reliable imaging modality to differentiate between OM, STI, and Charcot in patients with suspected DFI.

Molecular Imaging of Diabetic Foot Infections: New Tools for Old Questions

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a common, complex, and costly medical problem with increasing prevalence. Diagnosing DFIs is a clinical challenge due to the poor specificity of the available methods to accurately determine the presence of infection in these patients. However, failure to perform an opportune diagnosis and provide optimal antibiotic therapy can lead to higher morbidity for the patient, unnecessary amputations, and increased healthcare costs. Novel developments in bacteria-specific molecular imaging can provide a non-invasive assessment of the infection site to support diagnosis, determine the extension and location of the infection, guide the selection of antibiotics, and monitor the response to treatment. This is a review of recent research in molecular imaging of infections in the context of DFI. We summarize different clinical and preclinical methods and the translational implications aimed to improve the care of patients with DFI.

What Is the Best Method to Differentiate Acute Charcot Foot From Acute Infection?

RECOMMENDATION

Differentiation between acute Charcot neuroarthropathy (CN) and acute infection/osteomyelitis is complex and requires multiple (>1) diagnostic criteria. These criteria include an emphasis on the presence of neuropathy, history, and physical examination. The absence of skin wounds and resolution of swelling/erythema with elevation makes the likelihood of infection very low. In unclear cases, laboratory testing, histologic examination and culturing of bone specimens, scintigraphy, and imaging, especially magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), may be of benefit.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Moderate.

DELEGATE VOTE

Agree: 100%, Disagree: 0%, Abstain: 0% (Unanimous, Strongest Consensus).

Charcot Neuroarthropathy: From the Laboratory to the Bedside

BACKGROUND

The diabetic Charcot foot syndrome is a serious and potentially limbthreatening lower-extremity complication of diabetes.

INTRODUCTION

The present review provides a concise account of the advances made over the last twentyfive years in understanding the pathogenesis and management of Charcot neuroarthropathy (CN).

METHODS

In this study, the widely known pathogenetic mechanisms underpinning CN are brought into focus, particularly the role of RANKL/RANK/OPG system and advanced glycation end production in the pathogenesis of CN. Furthermore, other potential triggering factors, namely nitric oxide, endothelial dysfunction, macro calcifications and body weight that influence CN have also been discussed.

RESULTS

The wide range of diagnostic tools available to clinicians for accurate staging of this pathology has been examined, particularly radiological and nuclear medicine imaging. Additionally, the difficult differential diagnosis between osteomyelitis and CN is also elucidated.

CONCLUSION

The review concludes with the comprehensive summary of the major promising therapeutic strategies, including conservative treatment involving orthopedic devices, pharmacological approach, and the most common surgical techniques currently employed in the diagnosis and treatment of this acute disease.

Modern management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. The when, how and why of conservative approaches

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) has long been considered a complex infection that is both difficult to diagnose and treat, and is associated with a high rate of relapse and limb loss. Areas covered: DFO can usually be diagnosed by a combination of clinical evaluation, serum inflammatory markers and plain X-ray. When the results of these procedures are negative or contradictory, advanced imaging tests or bone biopsy may be necessary. Staphylococcus aureus remains the most frequent microorganism isolated from bone specimens, but infection is often polymicrobial. Antibiotic therapy, preferably with oral agents guided by results of bone culture, for a duration of no more than six weeks, appears to be as safe and effective as surgery in cases of uncomplicated forefoot DFO. Surgery (which should be limb-sparing when possible) is always required for DFO accompanied by necrotizing fasciitis, deep abscess, gangrene or in cases not responding (either clinically or radiographically) to apparently appropriate antibiotic treatment. Expert commentary: Research in the past decade has improved diagnosis and treatment of DFO, and most cases can now be managed with a 'conservative' approach, defined as treatment either exclusively with antibiotics or with surgery removing as little bone and soft tissue as necessary.

Viability of permanent PMMA spacer with combined free fasciocutaneous tissue transfer for failed charcot reconstruction: A 38 month prospective case report

•

This case report demonstrates the long term viability and utility of the use of permanent cement spacers when combined with free tissue transfer for closure of complex diabetic foot wounds.

•

Charcot Neuroarthropathy often requires osseous reconstruction, which can be complicated with osteomyelitis and hardware infection.

•

This case is an example of a multidisciplinary team approach to limb salvage with successful long term outcome; a plantigrade stable functional foot in an ambulatory highly active patient.

•

Follow up time since initial intervention was 38 months.

Introduction

Charcot Neuroarthropathy is a complex lower extremity pathology which predisposes the afflicted limb to ulcerations, osteomyelitis, and risk of major amputation. Charcot Neuroarthropathy often requires osseous reconstruction, which can be complicated with osteomyelitis and hardware infection. When soft tissue and osseous deficits must be concomitantly addressed, the use of PMMA spacers can be combined with free tissue transfers.

Presentation of case

71 year old Caucasian male with Diabetic Charcot Neuroarthopathy underwent osseous reconstruction with internal hardware. The surgical site was complicated by acute infection, osteomyelitis, exposed hardware requiring removal, and multiple surgical débridement. The degree of soft tissue and osseous deficit post-débridement required complex reconstruction.

Discussion

The osseous deficit was addressed with the use of a permanent PMMA cement spacer. The soft tissue deficit was reconstructed with a free tissue transfer. This case report demonstrates the long term viability and utility of the use of permanent cement spacers when combined with free tissue transfer for closure of complex diabetic foot wounds. This case is an example of a multidisciplinary team approach to limb salvage with successful long term outcome; a plantigrade stable functional foot in an ambulatory highly active patient. Follow up time since initial intervention was 38 months.

Conclusion

The use of a permanent PMMA cement spacer does not preclude free tissue transfer in complex host lower extremity reconstruction. A multidisciplinary team approach is a vital component to successful salvage outcomes.

Charcot Arthropathy Versus Osteomyelitis: Evaluation and Management

Charcot arthropathy of the foot and ankle is a severe complication of peripheral neuropathy and is most commonly seen in the developed world in association with diabetes mellitus. Correct diagnosis and differentiation from osteomyelitis of the foot and ankle are critical to guide treatment. It can exist concomitantly with osteomyelitis, typically in the setting of an advanced midfoot ulcer. Simple plain radiographs and contrasted MRI studies often yield inconclusive or confusing data. Correct use of imaging studies and a clinical algorithm can be effective tools to help make accurate and early diagnoses and guide clinical interventions for these conditions.

Terahertz imaging for early screening of diabetic foot syndrome: A proof of concept

Most people with diabetes suffer some deterioration of the feet. Diabetic foot syndrome causes ulceration in about 15% of cases and such deterioration leads to amputation in about 2.5% of diabetic patients, diminishing their quality of life and generating extraordinary costs for patients and public health systems. Currently, there is no objective method for the detection of diabetic foot syndrome in its early stages. We propose terahertz imaging as a method for the evaluation of such deterioration. This screening method could aid the prevention and medical treatment of this condition in the future.

Long-Term Outcomes of Permanent Cement Spacers in the Infected Foot

When osteomyelitis occurs in the infected foot, cement spacers have been used as a limb salvage tool. The aim of the present study was to assess the longevity and outcomes in high-risk, low-demand patients who have undergone resection of bone and subsequent placement of permanent antibiotic-eluting cement spacers in the foot. A retrospective review case series of 30 patients who had undergone placement of a permanent antibiotic-eluting cement spacer in the foot were evaluated for retention, spacer exchange, removal, amputation, and functional status. The minimum follow-up time for inclusion was 12 months. Two thirds of all patients had successful spacers (n = 20) that were either retained (n = 14) or successfully exchanged (n = 6). One third of all patients experienced spacer failure (n = 10) and required removal. Of the 10 patients requiring spacer removal, 4 underwent removal with subsequent arthrodesis and 6 underwent removal with subsequent pseudoarthrosis. Also, 8 of these patients (26.7%) required partial foot amputation of the ipsilateral foot. These amputations were not directly related to the use or removal of the spacer. The average time to spacer removal or partial amputation was 20.9 (range 0.2 to 60.9) months. The longest retained spacer in the foot was 76 months at the last follow-up visit. The longest exchanged spacer at the last follow-up visit was 111 months. All surviving patients were ambulatory at the last follow-up visit.

Neuropathic Minimally Invasive Surgeries (NEMESIS):: Percutaneous Diabetic Foot Surgery and Reconstruction

Patients with peripheral neuropathy associated with ulceration are the nemesis of the orthopedic foot and ankle surgeon. Diabetic foot syndrome is the leading cause of peripheral neuropathy, and its prevalence continues to increase at an alarming rate. Poor wound healing, nonunion, infection, and risk of amputation contribute to the understandable caution toward this patient group. Significant metalwork is required to hold these technically challenging deformities. Neuropathic Minimally Invasive Surgeries is an addition to the toolbox of management of the diabetic foot. It may potentially reduce the risk associated with large wounds and bony correction in this patient group.

Neuropathic osteoarthropathy with and without superimposed osteomyelitis in patients with a diabetic foot

Soft tissue and bone infection involving the foot is one of the most common long-term complications of diabetes mellitus, implying a serious impairment in quality of life for patients in the advanced stages of the disease. Neuropathic osteoarthropathy often coexists and differentiating between these two entities is commonly challenging, but crucial, as the management may differ substantially. The importance of correct diagnosis cannot be understated and effective management requires a multidisciplinary approach owing to the complicated nature of therapy in such patients. A missed diagnosis has a high likelihood of major morbidity for the patient, including limb amputation, and over-diagnosis results in a great socioeconomic challenge for healthcare systems, the over-utilization of healthcare resources, and the unwise use of antibiotics. Diagnosis is largely based on clinical signs supplemented by various imaging modalities such as radiography, MR imaging, and hybrid imaging techniques such as F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. In the interests of the management of diabetic foot complications, this review article is aimed on the one hand at providing radiologists with important clinical knowledge, and on the other hand to equip clinicians with relevant radiological semiotics.

Extension and grading of osteomyelitis are not related to limb salvage in Charcot neuropathic osteoarthropathy: A cohort prospective study

AIMS

Charcot neuropathic osteoarthropathy (CN) represents a complication for diabetic patients which involves a progressive alteration of the osteoarticular apparatus with high risk of amputation. The aim of the study was to assess whether the localization of CN and the extent or grading of the osteomyelitis have an influence on the rate of limb salvage and the time to recovery.

METHODS

We treated a diabetic population affected by CN complicated by ulceration and widespread osteomyelitic involvement. All patients were treated surgically to eliminate infected tissues, stabilize and correct the bone deformities. Histopathological and microbiological analyses were carried out on the bone specimens.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients affected by CN complicated by large osteomyelitic involvement of midfoot and/or ankle were treated between January 2010 and May 2014. The mean follow-up was 409,35 ± 154,06 days. Thirty patients had complete recovery (90.91%) at the end of follow-up. No difference in limb salvage rate and time to recovery was observed when stratifying the population according to CN localization, extent and grading of osteomyelitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort prospective study we observed a high percentage of limb salvage in patients affected by CN complicated by diffuse midfoot/hindfoot osteomyelitis. The localization of Charcot deformity and the extent/stage of osteomyelitis did not change the rate of limb salvage.

Sonographic Findings of Common Musculoskeletal Diseases in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus (DM) can accompany many musculoskeletal (MSK) diseases. It is difficult to distinguish the DM-related MSK diseases based on clinical symptoms alone. Sonography is frequently used as a first imaging study for these MSK symptoms and is helpful to differentiate the various DM-related MSK diseases. This pictorial essay focuses on sonographic findings of various MSK diseases that can occur in diabetic patients.

Magnetic resonance imaging of diabetic foot complications

This pictorial review aims to illustrate the various manifestations of the diabetic foot on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. The utility of MR imaging and its imaging features in the diagnosis of pedal osteomyelitis are illustrated. There is often difficulty encountered in distinguishing osteomyelitis from neuroarthropathy, both clinically and on imaging. By providing an accurate diagnosis based on imaging, the radiologist plays a significant role in the management of patients with complications of diabetic foot.

The diabetic foot in 2015: an overview

In 2015, it can be said that the diabetic foot is no longer the Cinderella of diabetic complications. Thirty years ago there was little evidence-based research taking place on the diabetic foot, and there were no international meetings addressing this topic. Since then, the biennial Malvern Diabetic Foot meetings started in 1986, the American Diabetes Association founded their Foot Council in 1987, and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes established a Foot Study Group in 1998. The first International Symposium on the Diabetic Foot in The Netherlands was convened in 1991, and this was soon followed by the establishment of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot that has produced useful guidelines in several areas of investigation and the management of diabetic foot problems. There has been an exponential rise in publications on diabetic foot problems in high impact factor journals, and a comprehensive evidence-base now exists for many areas of treatment. Despite the extensive evidence available, it, unfortunately, remains difficult to demonstrate that most types of education are efficient in reducing the incidence of foot ulcers. However, there is evidence that education as part of a multi-disciplinary approach to diabetic foot ulceration plays a pivotal role in incidence reduction. With respect to treatment, strong evidence exists that offloading is the best modality for healing plantar neuropathic foot ulcers, and there is also evidence from two randomized controlled trials to support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in complex post-surgical diabetic foot wounds. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy exhibits the same evidence level and strength of recommendation. International guidelines exist on the management of infection in the diabetic foot. Many randomized trials have been performed, and these have shown that the agents studied generally produced comparable results, with the exception of one study in which tigecycline was shown to be clinically inferior to ertapenem ± vancomycin. Similarly, there are numerous types of wound dressings that might be used in treatment and which have shown efficacy, but no single type (or brand) has shown superiority over others. Peripheral artery disease is another major contributory factor in the development of ulceration, and its presence is a strong predictor of non-healing and amputation. Despite the proliferation of endovascular procedures in addition to open revascularization, many patients continue to suffer from severely impaired perfusion and exhaust all treatment options. Finally, the question of the true aetiopathogenesis of Charcot neuroarthropathy remains enigmatic, although much work is currently being undertaken in this area. In this area, it is most important to remember that a clinically uninfected, warm, insensate foot in a diabetic patient should be considered as a Charcot foot until proven otherwise, and, as such, treated with offloading, preferably in a cast.

Lower limb complications of diabetes mellitus: a comprehensive review with clinicopathological insights from a dedicated high-risk diabetic foot multidisciplinary team

Diabetic complications in the lower extremity are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and impact heavily upon the public health system. Early and accurate recognition of these abnormalities is crucial, enabling the early initiation of treatments and thus avoiding or minimizing deformity, dysfunction and amputation. Following careful clinical assessment, radiological imaging is central to the diagnostic and follow-up process. We aim to provide a comprehensive review of diabetic lower limb complications designed to assist radiologists and to contribute to better outcomes for these patients.

Challenges in diagnosing infection in the diabetic foot

Diagnosing the presence of infection in the foot of a patient with diabetes can sometimes be a difficult task. Because open wounds are always colonized with microorganisms, most agree that infection should be diagnosed by the presence of systemic or local signs of inflammation. Determining whether or not infection is present in bone can be especially difficult. Diagnosis begins with a history and physical examination in which both classic and 'secondary' findings suggesting invasion of microorganisms or a host response are sought. Serological tests may be helpful, especially measurement of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate in osteomyelitis, but all (including bone biomarkers and procalcitonin) are relatively non-specific. Cultures of properly obtained soft tissue and bone specimens can diagnose and define the causative pathogens in diabetic foot infections. Newer molecular microbial techniques, which may not only identify more organisms but also virulence factors and antibiotic resistance, look very promising. Imaging tests generally begin with plain X-rays; when these are inconclusive or when more detail of bone or soft tissue abnormalities is required, more advanced studies are needed. Among these, magnetic resonance imaging is generally superior to standard radionuclide studies, but newer hybrid imaging techniques (single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography, positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging) look to be useful techniques, and new radiopharmaceuticals are on the horizon. In some cases, ultrasonography, photographic and thermographic methods may also be diagnostically useful. Improved methods developed and tested over the past decade have clearly increased our accuracy in diagnosing diabetic foot infections.

Charcot foot syndrome

Charcot foot syndrome is an uncommon complication of diabetes but is potentially devastating in its consequences. Outcome is made worse by widespread professional ignorance leading to delayed diagnosis, but it is also hampered by lack of understanding of its causes and lack of treatments with proven effectiveness, other than offloading. There remains a desperate need for studies into its causes as well as comparative audit and trials designed to determine the best treatment for this difficult condition. Such work can probably only be effectively carried out through the establishment of multicentre networks. Nevertheless, improved understanding in recent years of the likely role of inflammatory pathways has raised awareness of the multiple ways in which the effects of neuropathy may be manifest in the development of the Charcot foot. This awareness is also leading to the realization that similar processes may conceivably contribute to the refractoriness of other foot diseases in diabetes, including both chronic unhealing ulcers and osteomyelitis.

Forefoot: a basic integrated imaging perspective for radiologists

Imaging of the forefoot is increasingly requested for patients with metatarsalgia. Awareness with specific anatomic arrangements exclusive for the forefoot and widely variable pathologic entities associated with metatarsalgia helps the radiologist to tailor a cost-effective imaging approach. This will enable reaching a specific diagnosis as much as possible with subsequent proper patient management. This pictorial review aims to provide basic understanding for the different imaging modalities used in studying the forefoot. After that, certain anatomic arrangements exclusive for the forefoot are discussed. The final section of this review describes the imaging findings of some common forefoot problems.

Charcot neuroarthropathy of the foot and ankle: diagnosis and management strategies

This article reviews current literature discussing the etiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and imaging, and conservative and surgical treatment of Charcot osteoarthropathy. The treatment of Charcot osteoarthropathy with concurrent osteomyelitis is also discussed.

Imaging of diabetic foot infections

Complications from diabetic foot infections are a leading cause of nontraumatic lower-extremity amputations. Nearly 85% of these amputations result from an infected foot ulcer. Osteomyelitis is present in approximately 20% of diabetic foot infections. It is imperative that clinicians make quick and successful diagnoses of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) because a delay in treatment may lead to worsening outcomes. Imaging studies, such as plain films, bone scans, musculoskeletal ultrasound, computerized tomography scans, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography scans, aid in the diagnosis. However, there are several mimickers of DFO, which present problems to making a correct diagnosis.

Charcot neuroarthropathy of the foot and ankle

Charcot neuroarthropathy (CN) is a rare, progressive, deforming disease of bone and joints, especially affecting the foot and ankle and leading to considerable morbidity. It can also affect other joints such as the wrist, knee, spine and shoulder. This disease, described originally in reference to syphilis, is now one of the most common associates of diabetes mellitus. As the number of diabetics increase, the incidence of CN is bound to rise. Faster initial diagnosis and prompt institution of treatment may help to reduce its sequelae. There should be a low threshold for ordering investigations to assist coming to this diagnosis. No single investigation is the gold standard. Recent studies on pathogenesis and development of newer investigation modalities have helped to clarify the mystery of its pathogenesis and of its diagnosis in the acute phase. Various complementary investigations together allow the correct diagnosis to be made. Osteomyelitis continues to be confused with acute CN. Hybrid positron emission tomography has shown some promise in differentiating these conditions. A multispecialty approach involving diabetologists, orthopaedists and podiatrists should be used to tackle this difficult problem. The aim of this article is to describe current knowledge about CN with particular reference to the status of diagnostic indicators and management options.

Osteomyelitis or Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy? Differentiating these disorders in diabetic patients with a foot problem

Both osteomyelitis and Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CN) are potentially limb-threatening complications of diabetic neuropathy, but they require quite different treatments. Almost all bone infections in the diabetic foot originate from an infected foot ulcer while diabetic osteoarthropathy is a non-infectious process in which peripheral neuropathy plays the critical role. Differentiating between diabetic foot osteomyelitis and CN requires careful evaluation of the patient, including the medical history, physical examination, selected laboratory findings, and imaging studies. Based on available studies, we review the approaches to the diagnostic differentiation of osteomyelitis from CN of the foot in diabetic patients.

Charcot foot and ankle with osteomyelitis

This paper presents a review of the current literature discussing topics of Charcot osteoarthropathy, osteomyelitis, diagnosing osteomyelitis, antibiotic management of osteomyelitis, and treatment strategies for management of Charcot osteoarthropathy with concurrent osteomyelitis.

Developing an evidence-based clinical pathway for the assessment, diagnosis and management of acute Charcot Neuro-Arthropathy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Charcot Neuro-Arthropathy (CN) is one of the more devastating complications of diabetes. To the best of the authors' knowledge, it appears that no clinical tools based on a systematic review of existing literature have been developed to manage acute CN. Thus, the aim of this paper was to systematically review existing literature and develop an evidence-based clinical pathway for the assessment, diagnosis and management of acute CN in patients with diabetes.

METHODS

Electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase and Cochrane Library), reference lists, and relevant key websites were systematically searched for literature discussing the assessment, diagnosis and/or management of acute CN published between 2002-2012. At least two independent investigators then quality rated and graded the evidence of each included paper. Consistent recommendations emanating from the included papers were then fashioned in a clinical pathway.

RESULTS

The systematic search identified 267 manuscripts, of which 117 (44%) met the inclusion criteria for this study. Most manuscripts discussing the assessment, diagnosis and/or management of acute CN constituted level IV (case series) or EO (expert opinion) evidence. The included literature was used to develop an evidence-based clinical pathway for the assessment, investigations, diagnosis and management of acute CN.

CONCLUSIONS

This research has assisted in developing a comprehensive, evidence-based clinical pathway to promote consistent and optimal practice in the assessment, diagnosis and management of acute CN. The pathway aims to support health professionals in making early diagnosis and providing appropriate immediate management of acute CN, ultimately reducing its associated complications such as amputations and hospitalisations.

Effect of immobilization, off-loading and zoledronic acid on bone mineral density in patients with acute Charcot neuroarthropathy: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are commonly used as an adjuvant in the management of acute Charcot neuroarthropathy (CNA), although the clinical efficacy of the treatment is controversial. The aim of the present study is to investigate the effect of immobilization and zoledronic acid on bone mineral density (BMD) changes during the treatment of acute CNA.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients with acute midfoot CNA were randomly assigned to treatment with either zolendronic acid or placebo. BMD of the lumbar spine and both hips was measured at baseline and after six months of treatment.

RESULTS

Comparison between BMD at presentation and at 6 months demonstrated a significant fall in BMD in the placebo group at the CNA-affected femoral neck (-3.2%, p=0.016) and in the CNA-free hip (-1.2%, p=0.026). Conversely, a significant rise in BMD was observed in the zolendronic acid group at all measured areas of the CNA-free hip.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Immobilization and off-loading does not lead to marked disuse osteoporosis in patients with acute CNA after 6 months of treatment. Treatment with zoledronic acid led to a statistically significant increase in hip BMD compared to placebo.

2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections

Foot infections are a common and serious problem in persons with diabetes. Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) typically begin in a wound, most often a neuropathic ulceration. While all wounds are colonized with microorganisms, the presence of infection is defined by ≥2 classic findings of inflammation or purulence. Infections are then classified into mild (superficial and limited in size and depth), moderate (deeper or more extensive), or severe (accompanied by systemic signs or metabolic perturbations). This classification system, along with a vascular assessment, helps determine which patients should be hospitalized, which may require special imaging procedures or surgical interventions, and which will require amputation. Most DFIs are polymicrobial, with aerobic gram-positive cocci (GPC), and especially staphylococci, the most common causative organisms. Aerobic gram-negative bacilli are frequently copathogens in infections that are chronic or follow antibiotic treatment, and obligate anaerobes may be copathogens in ischemic or necrotic wounds. Wounds without evidence of soft tissue or bone infection do not require antibiotic therapy. For infected wounds, obtain a post-debridement specimen (preferably of tissue) for aerobic and anaerobic culture. Empiric antibiotic therapy can be narrowly targeted at GPC in many acutely infected patients, but those at risk for infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms or with chronic, previously treated, or severe infections usually require broader spectrum regimens. Imaging is helpful in most DFIs; plain radiographs may be sufficient, but magnetic resonance imaging is far more sensitive and specific. Osteomyelitis occurs in many diabetic patients with a foot wound and can be difficult to diagnose (optimally defined by bone culture and histology) and treat (often requiring surgical debridement or resection, and/or prolonged antibiotic therapy). Most DFIs require some surgical intervention, ranging from minor (debridement) to major (resection, amputation). Wounds must also be properly dressed and off-loaded of pressure, and patients need regular follow-up. An ischemic foot may require revascularization, and some nonresponding patients may benefit from selected adjunctive measures. Employing multidisciplinary foot teams improves outcomes. Clinicians and healthcare organizations should attempt to monitor, and thereby improve, their outcomes and processes in caring for DFIs.

Ultrasound-diagnosed bone and joint destruction as a typical image in advanced Charcots arthropathy - case report

The paper presents a case of Charcot foot in a patient with long standing type 2 diabetes and complicated by peripheral neuropathy. It was initially diagnosed by an ultrasound examination and subsequently confirmed by an X-ray and an magnetic resonance imaging. Diabetic neuropathy is nowadays the most frequent cause of Charcot arthropathy, although it can be also a result of other diseases of the nervous system. In the acute phase the patient usually presents with edema, redness and increased temperature of the foot, which can suggest many other diagnoses including bacterial infection, gout, venous thrombosis or trauma. Because of its non specific clinical presentation and unsufficient awareness of the specificity of the diabetic foot syndrome among health professionals and the patients the diagnosis of this process is in many cases delayed. In the acute phase appropriate treatment needs to be initiated (mainly off loading and immobilization of the foot in a total contact cast), otherwise a rapidly progressing destruction of the bones and joints will usually begin, leading to fractures, dislocations and a severe foot deformity. Increased awareness among doctors taking care of the diabetic patients and appropriate use of the imaging methods can definitely improve efficacy of the diagnostic process and help to optimize the treatment of Charcot arthropathy. The standard approach usually includes use of radiography, magnetic resonance imaging and scintigraphy. In some cases a sonographer may be the first one to notice typical signs of bony destruction in a patient with Charcot arthropathy and suggest immediate further imaging in order to confirm the diagnosis and to minimize the risk of mutilating complications.