2001
DOI: 10.1097/00006231-200104000-00058
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

46. A three-hour 111In-leukocyte scan as a surrogate for a colloid marrow scan in the diagnosis of osteomyelitis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2004
2004

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Analysis of the first 23 patients suggested a very high sensitivity (100%) for detecting discordance but a low specificity (50%), suggesting that a nanocolloid scan would be necessary in the presence of discordance between 3-hour and 22-hour leukocyte images, but not if there was concordance. 31 Expansion of the series, however, has not completely sustained this conclusion, although with a negative predictive value of 87% it remains highly likely that the finding of concordance between 3-hour and 22-hour leukocyte images will be reproduced if a nanocolloid scan is obtained. Of course, sensitivity and specificity values do not portray the whole story and in many instances it is clear on the basis of discordance that infection is present, and vice versa in the case of clear concordance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Analysis of the first 23 patients suggested a very high sensitivity (100%) for detecting discordance but a low specificity (50%), suggesting that a nanocolloid scan would be necessary in the presence of discordance between 3-hour and 22-hour leukocyte images, but not if there was concordance. 31 Expansion of the series, however, has not completely sustained this conclusion, although with a negative predictive value of 87% it remains highly likely that the finding of concordance between 3-hour and 22-hour leukocyte images will be reproduced if a nanocolloid scan is obtained. Of course, sensitivity and specificity values do not portray the whole story and in many instances it is clear on the basis of discordance that infection is present, and vice versa in the case of clear concordance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%