ObjectivesTo determine the prevalence of bone marrow oedema (BME) at the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) in early postpartum (EPP), nulliparous (NP) and late postpartum (LPP) women, and to identify factors associated with BME presence at the SIJ.MethodsThree groups were obtained: NP (never given birth), EPP (given birth within 12 months) and LPP (given birth more than 24 months). The primary outcome was the presence of BME and/or structural lesions (erosions, osteophytes, ankylosis and sclerosis) at the SIJ MRI.ResultsBME prevalence was greater among EPP (33%) than NP (14%, p=0.001), but was not different to LPP (21%, p=0.071). The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) MRI criteria for sacroiliitis were positive in 75%, 71% and 80%, respectively, of EPP, NP and LPP women with BME. EPP (38%) had similar prevalence of sclerosis than LPP (28%, p=0.135), but greater than NP (18%, p=0.001). Lastly, EPP (28%) had similar prevalence of osteophytes than LPP (42%) and NP (27%), although there was a difference between LPP and NP (p=0.006).ConclusionsEPP have higher BME prevalence at the SIJ than NP, EPP tend to have higher BME prevalence compared with LPP and BME presence decreases with time from delivery. Three-quarters of women with BME at the SIJ had a positive ASAS MRI criteria for sacroiliitis, indicating that BME presence as the main criterion for a positive diagnosis can lead to false-positive results. SIJ MRIs should not be interpreted in isolation, since age, time from delivery and other factors may outweigh the pertinence of MRI findings.Trial registration numberNCT02956824
Background: Ultra low dose chest computed tomography (CT) acquisitions have been used for selected emergency room patients with acute dyspnea or minor thoracic trauma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ultra-low-dose (ULD) chest CT for detecting viral pneumonia patterns compared to standard (STD) dose chest CT.Methods: All consecutive adult patients with two non-enhanced chest CT acquisitions, one STD and one ULD, for suspicion of viral pneumonia between March 5 th and April 2 nd 2020 were included. CT results were divided into two groups: non-viral pneumonia CT or compatible with viral pneumonia CT based on viral pneumonia CT patterns: ground-glass opacity (GGO), consolidation, crazy paving, air bronchogram signs and fibrous stripes. The diagnostic performance of ULD CT for suspicion of viral pneumonia was evaluated.For CTs compatible with viral pneumonia, CT pattern detection on ULD CT was assessed and STD CT was used as a reference.
Results:The study included 380 patients with 97 CTs (25.5%) compatible with viral pneumonia. The mean effective doses (EDs) were 1.66 (1.29; 2.18) mSv for STD and 0.20 (0.18; 0.22) mSv for ULD CT (P<0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of ULD CT for viral pneumonia detection were 98.9% and 99.0%, respectively. GGO, consolidation and fibrous stripes were equally visible in STD and ULD in 100% (n=97), 36% (n=35) and 23% (n=22) of compatible viral pneumonia-CT patients, respectively. Air bronchogram sign detection was equivalent, concerning 23% (n=22) of patients in STD and 22% (n=21) in ULD. Crazy paving was visible in 24% (n=23) of patients in STD and only 8% (n=8) in ULD (P=0.003).
Conclusions:In comparison to STD dose chest CT, ULD chest CT, with a mean reduction dose of 88.0%, has comparable diagnostic performance for detecting viral pneumonia on CT.
Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
Patient consent for publication Not required.Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.