リケラボ論文検索は、全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索できる論文検索サービスです。

リケラボ 全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索するならリケラボ論文検索大学・研究所にある論文を検索できる

リケラボ 全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索するならリケラボ論文検索大学・研究所にある論文を検索できる

大学・研究所にある論文を検索できる 「Influence of Metal Implants on Quantitative Evaluation of Bone Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography」の論文概要。リケラボ論文検索は、全国の大学リポジトリにある学位論文・教授論文を一括検索できる論文検索サービスです。
リケラボ

コピーが完了しました

URLをコピーしました

論文の公開元へ論文の公開元へ
書き出し

Influence of Metal Implants on Quantitative Evaluation of Bone Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography

Oe, Keisuke Zeng, Feibi Niikura, Takahiro Fukui, Tomoaki Sawauchi, Kenichi Matsumoto, Tomoyuki Nogami, Munenobu Murakami, Takamichi Kuroda, Ryosuke 神戸大学

2022.11

概要

When visualizing biological activity at nonunion sites by the radioisotopes, gamma rays are more attenuated if metal implants are placed in the bone. However, the effects of various implant types and their placement on gamma ray attenuation in quantitative evaluation remain unknown. To elucidate these effects, we created a phantom that simulated the nonunion of the femur in this study. The count of gamma rays was measured by single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) while considering CT-based attenuation correction (CTAC), metal implant placement, type (intramedullary nail or plate), and position. The count differed significantly with and without CTAC and with and without implants (both types) under CTAC. Significantly different counts were observed between the intramedullary nail and plate placed contralaterally to the lesion (i.e., non-lesion side). No significant difference was observed between the intramedullary nail and plate on the lesion side or between plates on the non-lesion and lesion sides. The measured standardized uptake value (SUV) was closer to the true SUV with CTAC than without. Moreover, the count was higher with implants than without. However, even with implants, it was lower than the actual count, indicating the absence of overcorrection. Implant type and position do not seem to influence the count.

論文の公開元へ

関連論文

関連論文をもっと見る

参考文献

1. Zura, R.; Watson, J.T.; Einhorn, T.; Mehta, S.; Della Rocca, G.J.; Xiong, Z.; Wang, Z.; Jones, J.; Steen, R.G. An inception cohort analysis to predict nonunion in tibia and 17 other fracture locations. Injury 2017, 48, 1194–1203. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2. Stewart, S.K. Fracture non-union: A review of clinical challenges and future research needs. Malays. Orthop. J. 2019, 13, 1–10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3. Adams, C.I.; Keating, J.F.; Court-Brown, C.M. Cigarette smoking and open tibial fractures. Injury 2001, 32, 61–65. [CrossRef]

4. Hernandez, R.K.; Do, T.P.; Critchlow, C.W.; Dent, R.E.; Jick, S.S. Patient-related risk factors for fracture-healing complications in the United Kingdom General Practice Research Database. Acta Orthop. 2012, 83, 653–660. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5. Watanabe, Y.; Takenaka, N.; Kobayashi, M.; Matsushita, T. Infra-isthmal fracture is a risk factor for nonunion after femoral nailing: A case-control study. J. Orthop. Sci. 2013, 18, 76–80. [CrossRef]

6. Oe, K.; Zeng, F.; Fukui, T.; Nogami, M.; Murakami, T.; Matsumoto, T.; Kuroda, R.; Niikura, T. Quantitative bone single-photon emission computed tomography imaging for uninfected nonunion: Comparison of hypertrophic nonunion and non-hypertrophic nonunion. J. Orthop. Surg. Res. 2021, 16, 125. [CrossRef]

7. Niikura, T.; Lee, S.Y.; Sakai, Y.; Nishida, K.; Kuroda, R.; Kurosaka, M. Comparison of radiographic appearance and bone scintigraphy in fracture nonunions. Orthopedics 2014, 37, e44–e50. [CrossRef]

8. Duncan, I.; Ingold, N. The clinical value of xSPECT/CT bone versus SPECT/CT. A prospective comparison of 200 scans. Eur. J. Hybrid Imaging 2018, 2, 4. [CrossRef]

9. Sumer, J.; Schmidt, D.; Ritt, P.; Lell, M.; Forst, R.; Kuwert, T.; Richter, R. SPECT/CT in patients with lower back pain after lumbar fusion surgery. Nucl. Med. Commun. 2013, 34, 964–970. [CrossRef]

10. Mushtaq, N.; To, K.; Gooding, C.; Khan, W. Radiological imaging evaluation of the failing total hip replacement. Front. Surg. 2019, 6, 35. [CrossRef]

11. Bhure, U.; Agten, C.; Lehnick, D.; Perez-Lago, M.D.S.; Beeres, F.; Link, B.C.; Strobel, K. Value of SPECT/CT in the assessment of necrotic bone fragments in patients with delayed bone healing or non-union after traumatic fractures. Br. J. Radiol. 2020, 93, 20200300. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12. Strobel, K.; van der Bruggen, W.; Hug, U.; Gnanasegaran, G.; Kampen, W.U.; Kuwert, T.; Paycha, F.; van den Wyngaert, T. SPECT/CT in postoperative hand and wrist pain. Semin. Nucl. Med. 2018, 48, 396–409. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

13. Ichikawa, H.; Miwa, K.; Matsutomo, N.; Watanabe, Y.; Kato, T.; Shimada, H. Development of a novel body phantom with bone equivalent density for evaluation of Bone SPECT. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2015, 71, 1235–1240. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14. Amarasekera, H.W.; Costa, M.L.; Parsons, N.; Achten, J.; Griffin, D.R.; Manktelow, S.; Williams, N.R. SPECT/CT bone imaging after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: Is it feasible to use CT attenuation correction in the presence of metal implants? Nucl. Med. Commun. 2011, 32, 289–297. [CrossRef]

15. Chew, C.G.; Lewis, P.; Middleton, F.; van den Wijngaard, R.; Deshaies, A. Radionuclide arthrogram with SPECT/CT for the evaluation of mechanical loosening of hip and knee prostheses. Ann. Nucl. Med. 2010, 24, 735–743. [CrossRef]

16. Miwa, K.; Matsutomo, N.; Ichikawa, H.; Kikuchi, A.; Shimada, H.; Narita, A.; Mori, K.; Fujino, K. Guideline on standardization of bone SPECT imaging. Jpn. J. Nucl. Med. Tech. 2017, 37, 517–530.

17. Suzuki, A.; Koshida, K.; Matsubara, K. Adjustment of overestimated CT-based attenuation correction on bone SPECT/CT after hip-resurfacing arthroplasty. J. Nucl. Med. Technol. 2013, 41, 203–207. [CrossRef]

18. Lai, P.J.; Hsu, Y.H.; Chou, Y.C.; Yeh, W.L.; Ueng, S.W.N.; Yu, Y.H. Augmentative antirotational plating provided a significantly higher union rate than exchanging reamed nailing in treatment for femoral shaft aseptic atrophic nonunion—Retrospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2019, 20, 127. [CrossRef]

19. Mohamed, M.A.; Noaman, H.H.; Soroor, Y.O.; Elsayed, M. Plate augmentation and bone grafting in treatment of femoral shaft nonunion initially fixed by intramedullary nail. SICOT J. 2022, 8, 19. [CrossRef]

20. Mittal, K.K.; Gupta, H.; Kaushik, N. Reunion of post nail aseptic non-union of diaphyseal femoral fractures by augmentation plating, decortication and bone grafting—Replacement for exchange nailing. Injury 2021, 52, 1529–1533. [CrossRef]

21. Kubik, J.F.; Bornes, T.D.; Gausden, E.B.; Klinger, C.E.; Wellman, D.S.; Helfet, D.L. Surgical outcomes of dual-plate fixation for periprosthetic femur fractures around a stable hip arthroplasty stem. Arch. Orthop. Trauma Surg. 2021, 142, 3605–3611. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22. Ru, J.Y.; Cong, Y.; Shi, D.; Lu, Y.H.; Niu, Y.F.; Xu, H.D. Augmentative locking plate with autologous bone grafting for distal femoral nonunion subsequent to failed retrograde intramedullary nailing. Acta Orthop. Traumatol. Turc. 2016, 50, 393–399. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

参考文献をもっと見る

全国の大学の
卒論・修論・学位論文
を
一発検索！

この論文の関連論文を見る