Evidence Hub

Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT for bone marrow edema in patients with acute knee injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhi-Zhuo Li, Xue-Long Chen, Hui Fang, Cheng-Xin Li, Li-Jun Shi, Xiao-Yu Fan, Xin Xu, Fu-Qiang Gao et al.

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 2023

290 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Background Knee injuries are prevalent, and early diagnosis is crucial for guiding clinical therapy. MRI is the diagnostic gold standard for bone marrow edema (BME) in patients with acute knee injuries, yet there are still limitations. Dual-energy CT, a possible viable replacement, is being explored (DECT). Methods We systematically retrieved studies from EMBASE, Scopus, PUBMED, and the Cochrane Library and collected gray literatures. In accordance with the PRISMA-DTA standards, a systematic review was conducted between the study's initiation and July 31, 2021, utilizing an MRI reference standard and at least 10 adult patients with acute knee injuries to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of DECT for diagnosing BME. Two reviewers collected the study's details independently. For the meta-analysis, a bivariate mixed-effects regression model was utilized, and subgroup analysis was employed to determine the sources of variability. Results The research included nine studies that examined 290 individuals between the ages of 23 and 53 with acute knee injuries who had DECT and MRI. Overall, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of the BME were 85% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 77–90%), 96% (95% CI: 93–97%), and 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95–0.98), respectively. To account for the assumed diversity of research, there were no statistically significant differences between the comparison groups in terms of specificity and sensitivity. Conclusion DECT is a viable alternative to MRI for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 290 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free