Evidence Hub

Quantitative Bone SPECT/CT in Varus-Type Ankle Osteoarthritis: Association With Radiographic Stage and Preoperative Pain

Shimokawa K, Matsubara H, Shibutani T, Kayano D, Nakazawa Y, Yoneyama H, Konishi T, Demura S

Foot & ankle international, 2026

44 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the potential clinical relevance of quantitative bone single-photon emission computed tomography combined with computed tomography (SPECT/CT) in patients with ankle osteoarthritis (AOA), focusing on the relationship between radiotracer uptake and disease severity, as well as its correlation with preoperative subjective pain levels.

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 44 patients with varus-type AOA who underwent preoperative bone SPECT/CT between July 2018 and October 2024. All patients were classified according to the Takakura-Tanaka classification: stage 2 (n = 5), stage 3a (n = 15), stage 3b (n = 13), and stage 4 (n = 11). Quantitative parameters included the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), SUVpeak, and total bone uptake (TBU), calculated at thresholds of 20% and 40% of SUVmax. Pain severity was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) within 1 month of imaging. Group comparisons were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn post hoc analysis. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to assess associations between uptake values and VAS scores.

RESULTS: Both SUV and TBU values showed a general increase in accordance with advancing radiographic stage. In post hoc comparisons with Bonferroni correction, SUVmax and SUVpeak showed significant differences between stages 2 and 3b, stages 2 and 4, and stages 3a and 4 (all P < .0125), whereas 20%TBU and 40%TBU showed significant differences between stages 2 and 4 and stages 3a and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 44 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