Differentiating brucella spondylitis from tuberculous spondylitis by the conventional MRI and MR T2 mapping: a prospective study.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Brucella
/ isolation & purification
Brucellosis
/ diagnosis
Diagnosis, Differential
Diagnostic Imaging
/ methods
Humans
Lumbar Vertebrae
/ microbiology
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ methods
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Spondylitis
/ diagnosis
Thoracic Vertebrae
/ microbiology
Tuberculosis, Spinal
/ diagnosis
Young Adult
Brucellosis
Quantitative
Spondylitis
T2 mapping
Tuberculous
Journal
European journal of medical research
ISSN: 2047-783X
Titre abrégé: Eur J Med Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9517857
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Oct 2021
28 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
03
04
2021
accepted:
06
10
2021
entrez:
29
10
2021
pubmed:
30
10
2021
medline:
5
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Brucella spondylitis (BS) and tuberculous spondylitis (TS), caused initially by bacteremia, are the two leading types of granulomatous spinal infections. BS is easy to miss or may be misdiagnosed as TS. Our purpose aims to differentiate BS from TS in conventional MR imaging and MR T2 mapping. We performed on 26 BS and 27 TS patients conventional MR imaging and MR T2 mapping. We analyzed the features in conventional MR imaging and measured T2 values of the lesion vertebrae (LV) and unaffected adjacent vertebrae (UAV) in BS and TS patients, respectively. There were no significant differences in sex, age, national between BS and TS. There was significantly lower severity of vertebral destruction, vertebral posterior convex deformity, dead bone, and abscess scope in BS when compared to TS (p < 0.001, p = 0.048, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). The vertebral hyperplasia was significantly higher in BS when compared to TS (p < 0.001). The T2 value of the LV with BS was markedly higher than that in the UAV with BS and that in the LV and UAV with TS (p < 0.001, p < 0.037, p < 0.001, respectively). The T2 value of the LV with TS was significantly higher than that of the UAV in TS and BS (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in the T2 value of the UAV between BS and TS (p = 0.568). The qualitative and quantitative evaluation may differentiate BS from TS. The conventional MR imaging helps to distinguish BS from TS by several distinctive features. MR T2 mapping has the additional potential to provide quantitative information between BS and TS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Brucella spondylitis (BS) and tuberculous spondylitis (TS), caused initially by bacteremia, are the two leading types of granulomatous spinal infections. BS is easy to miss or may be misdiagnosed as TS. Our purpose aims to differentiate BS from TS in conventional MR imaging and MR T2 mapping.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed on 26 BS and 27 TS patients conventional MR imaging and MR T2 mapping. We analyzed the features in conventional MR imaging and measured T2 values of the lesion vertebrae (LV) and unaffected adjacent vertebrae (UAV) in BS and TS patients, respectively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were no significant differences in sex, age, national between BS and TS. There was significantly lower severity of vertebral destruction, vertebral posterior convex deformity, dead bone, and abscess scope in BS when compared to TS (p < 0.001, p = 0.048, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). The vertebral hyperplasia was significantly higher in BS when compared to TS (p < 0.001). The T2 value of the LV with BS was markedly higher than that in the UAV with BS and that in the LV and UAV with TS (p < 0.001, p < 0.037, p < 0.001, respectively). The T2 value of the LV with TS was significantly higher than that of the UAV in TS and BS (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in the T2 value of the UAV between BS and TS (p = 0.568).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The qualitative and quantitative evaluation may differentiate BS from TS. The conventional MR imaging helps to distinguish BS from TS by several distinctive features. MR T2 mapping has the additional potential to provide quantitative information between BS and TS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34711265
doi: 10.1186/s40001-021-00598-4
pii: 10.1186/s40001-021-00598-4
pmc: PMC8555138
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
125Subventions
Organisme : Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 2017D01C300
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991 Jan;73(1):100-3
pubmed: 1991738
Radiol Med. 2014 Dec;119(12):928-933
pubmed: 24862632
Exp Ther Med. 2016 Oct;12(4):2069-2077
pubmed: 27698694
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018 Jan 22;19(1):25
pubmed: 29357844
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004 Jun;182(6):1405-10
pubmed: 15149983
Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2015 May;25(2):233-45
pubmed: 25952175
Eur Radiol. 2021 Jun;31(6):3590-3599
pubmed: 33274406
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Jun;97(26):e11195
pubmed: 29952971
Radiology. 1989 May;171(2):419-25
pubmed: 2704806
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Jan 15;42(2):113-121
pubmed: 27196025
Eur Spine J. 2019 Feb;28(2):234-240
pubmed: 30448986
Acad Radiol. 2018 Sep;25(9):1183-1189
pubmed: 29609954
J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 Jan 30;13(1):18
pubmed: 29378613
Rev Infect Dis. 1979 Sep-Oct;1(5):754-76
pubmed: 542761
Eur Spine J. 2001 Dec;10(6):529-33
pubmed: 11806395
Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Feb 1;46(3):426-33
pubmed: 18181740
Magn Reson Med. 2016 Jan;75(1):126-36
pubmed: 25753385
South Med J. 2007 Jun;100(6):613-4
pubmed: 17591319
Asian Spine J. 2018 Apr;12(2):317-324
pubmed: 29713414
J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2015 Jul-Dec;6(2):388-93
pubmed: 26283836
Radiol Med. 2010 Aug;115(5):794-803
pubmed: 20182812
Asian Pac J Trop Med. 2013 Oct;6(10):823-5
pubmed: 23870473
Biomed Res Int. 2019 May 2;2019:6396073
pubmed: 31187047
J Infect. 2007 Aug;55(2):158-63
pubmed: 17559939
Radiology. 1990 Oct;177(1):101-7
pubmed: 2399306
Rheumatol Int. 2012 Nov;32(11):3591-7
pubmed: 22095392