Gouty arthritis: Can we avoid unnecessary dual-energy CT examinations using prior radiographs?

Sivert Kupfer,Sebastian Winklhofer,Anton S. Becker,Oliver Distler,Christine B. Chung,Hatem Alkadhi,Tim Finkenstaedt
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200473
IF: 3.7
2018-07-10
PLoS ONE
Abstract:OBJECTIVE: The dual-energy CT (DECT) algorithm for urate detection is feasible only if hyperdense deposits are present. Based on our experience, around half of the performed DECT examinations show no such deposits and thus were useless for this indication. Our diagnostic accuracy study investigates whether conventional radiographs can serve as gatekeeper test prior to DECT for reliable exclusion of such radiopaque deposits.MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 77 clinically indicated DECT examinations of the hand (n = 29), foot (n = 36) and ankle (n = 12) of 55 patients (13 female, mean age 62±15 years) with suspected gouty arthritis were included. Two blinded readers independently evaluated DECT, gray-scale CT images (reference standard) and corresponding standardized radiographs for the presence/location of dense soft tissue deposits.RESULTS: Interreader agreement for detection of soft tissue deposits with DECT and radiographs was excellent (DECT: both readers, κ = 1; radiographs: both readers, κ = 0.94). DECT showed soft tissue deposits in 54/77 DECT (70%) scans. 30/54 scans (56%) showed deposits on the corresponding radiographs, while in 24 scans (44%) no deposits were seen on radiographs. Test performance of radiographs for soft tissue deposit detection: sensitivity 56%, specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 48.9%, and accuracy 69%. Low density of the deposits was the main reasons for false-negative radiographs (19 cases, 79%), followed by superimposition of deposits by osseous structures (5 cases, 21%).CONCLUSION: Conventional radiographs of the hand, foot and ankle cannot serve as a gatekeeper test for reliable exclusion of radiopaque soft tissue deposits prior to DECT.
multidisciplinary sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?