We have located links that may give you full text access.
Is Biopsying the Paravertebral Soft Tissue as Effective as Biopsying the Disk or Vertebral Endplate? 10-Year Retrospective Review of CT-Guided Biopsy of Diskitis-Osteomyelitis.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology 2015 July
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in biopsying bone (endplate), disk, or paravertebral soft tissue to culture the pathogenic organism causing diskitis-osteomyelitis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 111 spinal biopsies performed between 2002 and 2011. Pathologic examination was used as the reference standard for detecting diskitis-osteomyelitis. Microbiologic yield, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated. The yields for different groups were compared by use of Fisher exact test. The analysis was repeated with biopsy samples from patients not being treated with antibiotics at the time of biopsy.
RESULTS: A total of 122 biopsy specimens were obtained from 111 spinal biopsy procedures on 102 patients. Overall, 27 (22%) biopsies were performed on the endplate-disk, 61 (50%) on the disk only, and 34 (28%) on paravertebral soft tissue only. The microbiologic yield was 36% for all biopsies, 19% for endplate-disk biopsies, 39% for disk-only biopsies, and 44% for soft-tissue biopsies. The sensitivity and specificity of the microbiologic results for all specimens were 57% and 89%; endplate-disk, 38% and 86%; disk only, 57% and 89%; and paravertebral soft tissue, 68% and 92%. There was no statistically significant difference between the yields of the endplate-disk, disk-only, and paravertebral soft-tissue biopsies.
CONCLUSION: Paravertebral soft-tissue changes, when present, may be considered a viable target for biopsy in cases of diskitis-osteomyelitis, even in the absence of a paravertebral abscess.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 111 spinal biopsies performed between 2002 and 2011. Pathologic examination was used as the reference standard for detecting diskitis-osteomyelitis. Microbiologic yield, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated. The yields for different groups were compared by use of Fisher exact test. The analysis was repeated with biopsy samples from patients not being treated with antibiotics at the time of biopsy.
RESULTS: A total of 122 biopsy specimens were obtained from 111 spinal biopsy procedures on 102 patients. Overall, 27 (22%) biopsies were performed on the endplate-disk, 61 (50%) on the disk only, and 34 (28%) on paravertebral soft tissue only. The microbiologic yield was 36% for all biopsies, 19% for endplate-disk biopsies, 39% for disk-only biopsies, and 44% for soft-tissue biopsies. The sensitivity and specificity of the microbiologic results for all specimens were 57% and 89%; endplate-disk, 38% and 86%; disk only, 57% and 89%; and paravertebral soft tissue, 68% and 92%. There was no statistically significant difference between the yields of the endplate-disk, disk-only, and paravertebral soft-tissue biopsies.
CONCLUSION: Paravertebral soft-tissue changes, when present, may be considered a viable target for biopsy in cases of diskitis-osteomyelitis, even in the absence of a paravertebral abscess.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app