Special situations

Cure Arthritis Naturally

Cure Arthritis Naturally

Get Instant Access

In patients who have a history of chronic posttraumatic osteomyelitis and suspected reactivation of bone infection, MRI has a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 60%, an accuracy of 79%, a positive predictive value of 69%, and a negative predictive value of 100% [127].

Vertebral osteomyelitis can be detected early by MRI (before evident changes appear in radiographic studies) as soft tissue swelling and bone destruction [88]. Involvement of two adjacent vertebrae may be demonstrated 1 to 3 weeks before radiographic or tomographic evidence of bone destruction. The endplates are ill defined; the vertebral disc and adjacent vertebral bodies are hypointense on T1-weighted SE noncontrast images and hyperin-tense on STIR and T2-weighted SE images (Fig. 20) [128]. Early extension of inflammatory edema outside the limits of the vertebral bodies and the annulus fibrosus into the paravertebral fat causes low signal intensity on T1-weighted SE noncontrast images and hyperintense postcontrast and on STIR images [88].

In tuberculosis arthritis bone erosions are revealed more frequently than in pyogenic arthritis. The pannus of granulation tissue erodes and destroys cartilage and eventually bone [129]; this process is not uniformly distributed, so that areas of cartilaginous destruction may be intermixed with relatively normal areas. In general, the progression of joint space loss is more prominent with pyogenic arthritis than with tuberculosis arthritis because bacterial proteolytic enzymes accelerate articular cartilage destruction [130]. On MRI mycobacterial arthritis displays intermediate to low signal intensity

Pyogenic Arthritis

Fig. 19. MRI of chronic osteomyelitis of the femur in a patient who has diabetes. (A) Transaxial T1-weighted (TR/TE 650/20) SE image demonstrates fluid collections around the femur with extensive soft tissue inflammatory changes, abscess formation, and gas collections. (B) Transaxial T1-weighted (TR/TE 540/80) SE images with gadolinium reveal intramedullary gas collections and subperiosteal abscess formation (arrows). (C) Transaxial T2-weighted (TR/TE 2000/80) image shows an intramedullary area of low signal intensity surrounded by alternating bands of high and low signal intensity reminiscent of target appearance.

Fig. 19. MRI of chronic osteomyelitis of the femur in a patient who has diabetes. (A) Transaxial T1-weighted (TR/TE 650/20) SE image demonstrates fluid collections around the femur with extensive soft tissue inflammatory changes, abscess formation, and gas collections. (B) Transaxial T1-weighted (TR/TE 540/80) SE images with gadolinium reveal intramedullary gas collections and subperiosteal abscess formation (arrows). (C) Transaxial T2-weighted (TR/TE 2000/80) image shows an intramedullary area of low signal intensity surrounded by alternating bands of high and low signal intensity reminiscent of target appearance.

on T1-weighted images and high signal intensity on T2-weighted images in joint and adjacent bone [93].

Tuberculous osteomyelitis is suggested by the presence of hypointense T2-weighted image (secondary to areas of caseation) associated with soft tissue abscess [131]. Spinal tuberculosis typically starts at the anteroinferior aspect of vertebral body and spreads to contiguous vertebrae along the anterior longitudinal ligament of the spine [88,132]. Although one report has indicated the presence of high signal intensity in diseased areas on T1-weighted spin-echo MR images [133], low signal intensity on such images and high signal intensity on T2-weighted images are characteristic [134]. Typical findings are erosions of the anterior surfaces of the vertebral bodies with relative preservation of the disks and posterior elements, at least early in the course of the disease [128]. Subligamentous spread and pronounced paravertebral and epidural abscesses with tendency for distant caudal extension are frequent [88]. As the disease progress, collapse of the anterior portion of the vertebrae can lead to a kyphotic wedging deformity of the spine,

Vertebrae Anterior Wedging

Fig. 20. Spinal infection. (A) Sagittal T1-weighted (TR/TE 600/25) and (B) proton density (TR/ TE 2500/80) weighted MR images reveal abnormalities consistent with L4-L5 infection. In (A), abnormal regions of low signal intensity within the vertebral bodies. In (B), the signal intensity in these intraosseous regions is greater than that of the adjacent bone marrow.

Fig. 20. Spinal infection. (A) Sagittal T1-weighted (TR/TE 600/25) and (B) proton density (TR/ TE 2500/80) weighted MR images reveal abnormalities consistent with L4-L5 infection. In (A), abnormal regions of low signal intensity within the vertebral bodies. In (B), the signal intensity in these intraosseous regions is greater than that of the adjacent bone marrow.

the gibbous of Pott's disease. It has been suggested that tuberculous spondylitis has a lesser extent of marrow edema than observed in pyogenic spondylitis [130]. In almost 70% of cases it presents as a fusiform cold paraspinal abscess, with or without calcifications [135,136]. Vertebral bodies adjacent to infected disks are hypointense on T1-weighted MRI and hyperintense on T2-weighted MRI, with contrast enhancement and delineation of the extent of epidural involvement [137].

In neuropathic arthritis patients, mainly in patients who have diabetes, osteomyelitis could be a difficult diagnosis. MRI can be useful to demonstrate the presence of associated osteomyelitis (15%) or septic arthritis. Pedal osteomyelitis results almost exclusively from contiguous infection coming from the soft tissue ulceration and occurs most frequently around the fifth and first metatarsophalangeal joints. The formation of adventitious bursa or subcutaneous callus is a precursor to the ulceration that can be seen in the diabetic foot. Recognition of these bursae before onset of tissue breakdown may prevent sinus tract formation and osteomyelitis [138]. One third of patients who have advanced infection of the foot show evidence of septic arthritis on MRI [139]. Osteomyelitis in neuropathic feet of leprosy patients has similar findings to those of patients who have diabetes [140].

In children, diagnosis of a very early stage of osteomyelitis can be made with high sensitivity using the turbo inversion recovery magnitude (TIRM) with standard T1-weighted and T2-weigted MRI, with the advantage of no sedation being needed. A recognized limitation of TIRM sequences is the high signal in hematopoietic marrow of children under 3 years of age and the different degrees of marrow fat that are heterogeneous in the pediatric population [141]. MRI is especially useful for children who have pelvic [87] or vertebral osteomyelitis [2]; in the latter MRI has been found to have a sensitivity of 96% and a specificity of 93% [142].

The presence of osteomyelitis and bone infarction may coexist. Medullary infarcts might function as sequestra, predisposing to osteomyelitis and soft tissue infection [143]. The hallmark of avascular necrosis is hypointense peripheral band signal on all sequences, similar to rim sign; however, identification of a double-line sign on T2-weighted images is considered pathognomonic for osteonecrosis [144]. Gadolinium can also help to distinguish between infarction and osteomyelitis. The former shows thin, linear rim or long serpiginous central medullary enhancement, whereas osteomyelitis displays a thick, irregular peripheral enhancement around a nonenhancing center.

Patients who have rheumatoid arthritis have an increased risk for joint infection, so that in presence of a single disproportionately inflamed joint with inadequate therapy response and fever or in presence of immunosuppres-sive therapy, infection should be strongly considered. Osteoarticular rheumatic abnormalities in these patients might be difficult to distinguish from anatomic changes secondary to infection, however. MRI is an accurate method to evaluate the extent of the infective process; additionally, fat-suppressed gadolinium-enhanced sequences help to delineate marrow extension [145].

MRI is not useful for whole-body examinations (unlike radionuclide studies); metal implants in the region of interest may produce focal artifacts, mainly with high field systems [94].

Development of squamous cell carcinoma of the sinus tract is an uncommon, well-known complication of longstanding chronic osteomyelitis, which occurs in 0.23% to 1.6% of these patients [146,147]. MRI can identify this complication as an abnormal soft tissue mass [147-149].

Positron emission tomography and single photon emission computed tomography

The Positron Emission Tomography (PET) systems are relatively novel techniques that are being applied in several medical fields. Unfortunately there is limited availability of PET systems.

A nonspecific indicator of increased intracellular glucose metabolism, 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (18FDG) accumulates in infection and inflammation sites (leukocytes, granulocytes, and macrophages) [150,151]. Guhlmann and colleagues [152] were the first authors to evaluate the role of fluorodeox-yglucose PET (FDG-PET) in chronic osteomyelitis, reporting a high diagnostic accuracy of this method, especially in the axial skeleton. Further studies have deepened the diagnosis of acute and chronic osteomyelitis [153-155]. It has been demonstrated that FDG-PET has the highest diagnostic accuracy for confirming or excluding the diagnosis of chronic osteomyelitis in comparison with bone scintigraphy, MRI, or leukocyte scintigraphy; FDG-PET also is superior to leukocyte scintigraphy for detecting chronic osteomyelitis in the axial skeleton [44,156,157]. A limitation of this technique is that early bone healing involves a short inflammatory phase with highly activated metabolism and glucose consumption, which might be confused with osteomyelitis; however, this period of false positive images is smaller than with nuclear medicine modalities [158]. It is proposed, therefore, that in postsurgical and traumatic bone healing 18FDG-PET should be avoided in the first 3 to 6 months to minimize the risk for false positive findings [151]. This technique also may have limited usefulness in patients who have failed joint prosthesis or a tumor [66]. FDG-PET might play a role in the future in the diagnosis of osteomyelitis, but its value currently is not well defined.

Gallium-67 (67Ga) has been used successfully as an infection-detecting tracer in scintigraphy. PET imaging confirmed that the uptake of 68Ga was lower than that of 18FDG during normal bone healing; this fact has been proposed to play a significant role in lowering the possibility of false positive findings of osteomyelitis in postsurgical and posttraumatic bone healing. Further studies are needed to verify the value of 68Ga PET for clinical purposes, however [151]. Single positron emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT combines the functional evaluation provided by SPECT with the spatial definition of CT [159]. It can accurately identify the location of osteomyelitis foci in the appendicular and axial skeleton and differentiate between cortical, corticomedullary, and subperiosteal foci [160]. In addition, it may allow the discrimination between osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, and soft tissue infection [159]. Furthermore, this method had been suggested to be accurate for the evaluation of chronic posttraumatic osteomyelitis [159]. This claim is supported by the fact that acute fractures and postsurgical intervention of bone can increase 18FDG uptake, but this phenomenon lasts a maximum of 3 months; therefore, any abnormal increased 18FDG bone uptake after this period must be suspected to be secondary to infection or malignancy [161]. It has been suggested that SPECT/CT in addition to 67Ga or 111In WBC scintigraphy can accurately help in the precise localization and definition of the extension of infections, highlighting the potential role of combined imaging techniques [160].


Osteomyelitis frequently requires more than one imaging technique for an accurate diagnosis. Conventional radiography still remains the first imaging modality. MRI and nuclear medicine are the most sensitive and specific methods for the detection of osteomyelitis. MRI provides more accurate information regarding the extent of the infectious process. Ultrasound represents a noninvasive method to evaluate the involved soft tissues and cortical bone and may provide guidance for diagnostic or therapeutic aspiration, drainage, or tissue biopsy. CT scan can be a useful method to detect early osseous erosion and to document the presence of sequestra. PET and SPECT are highly accurate techniques for the evaluation of chronic osteomyelitis, allowing differentiation from soft tissue infection.


[1] Calhoun J, Manring M. Adult osteomyelitis. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2005;19:765-86.

[2] Kaplan S. Osteomyelitis in children. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2005;19:787-97.

[3] Stott NS. Review article: paediatric bone and joint infections. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2001;9:83-90.

[4] Lew DP, Waldvogel FA. Osteomyelitis. N Engl J Med 1997;336:999-1007.

[5] Cierny G III, Mader JT, Pennick JJ. A clinical staging system for adult osteomyelitis. Clin Orthop 2003;414:7-24.

[6] Patzakis M. Management of acute and chronic osteomyelitis. In: Chapman M, Szabo R, Marder R, et al, editors. Chapman's orthopaedic surgery. 3rd edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001. p. 3523-31.

[7] Nelson JD. Acute osteomyelitis in children. Infect Dis Clin N Am 1990;4:513.

[8] Karwowska A, Davies H, Jadavji T. Epidemiology and outcome of osteomyelitis in the era of sequential intravenous-oral therapy. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1998;17:1021.

[9] Bowerman S, Green N, Menco G. Decline of bone and joint infections attributable to Haemophilus influenzae type b. Clin Orthop 1997;341:128.

[10] Christiansen P, Frederiksen B, Glazowski J, et al. Epidemiologic, bacteriologic and long-term follow up data of children with acute hematogenous osteomyelitis and septic arthritis. J Pediatr Orthop 1999;8:302.

[11] Gylys-Morin VM. MR imaging of pediatric musculoskeletal inflammatory and infectious disorders. Magn Reson Clin N Am 1998;6:537-59.

[12] Soler R, Rodriguez E, Remuifian C, et al. MRI of musculoskeletal extraspinal tuberculosis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2001;25:177-83.

[13] Mufioz-Sanz A, Vera A, Vidigal FR. Case 23-2000: osteomyelitis in HIV-infected patients. [letter] N Engl J Med 2001;344:67.

[14] Spencer M, Burgener FA, Hampton BA. Osteomyelitis in AIDS patients. Radiology 1991; 181(P):155-6.

[15] Steinbach L, Tehranzadeh J, Fleckenstein J, et al. Human immunodeficiency virus infection: musculoskeletal manifestations. Radiology 1993;86:833-8.

[16] Lee DL, Sartoris DJ. Musculoskeletal manifestations of human immunodeficiency virus infection: review of imaging characteristics. Radiol Clin N Am 1994;32:399-411.

[17] Major NM, Tehranzadeh J. Musculoskeletal manifestations of AIDS. Radiol Clin N Am 1997;35:1167-89.

[18] Baron AL, Steinbach LS, LeBoit PE, et al. Osteolytic lesions and bacillary angiomatosis in HIV infection: radiologic differentiation from AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma. Radiology 1990;177:77-81.

[19] Leone A, Cerase A, Constantini A. Musculoskeletal tuberculosis. The Radiologist 2000;7: 227-37.

[20] Magid D, Fishman EK. Musculoskeletal infections in patients with AIDS: CT findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992;158:603-37.

[21] Wyatt SH, Fishman EKCT. MRI of musculoskeletal complications of AIDS. Skeletal Radiol 1995;24:481-8.

[22] Resnick D, Niwayama G. Osteomyelitis, septic arthritis and soft tissue infection: mechanisms and situations. In: Resnick D, editor. Diagnosis of bone and joint disorders. 3rd edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1995. p. 2325-418.

[23] Kothari NA, Pelchovitz DP, Meyer PJ. Imaging of musculoskeletal infections. Radiol Clin N Am 2001;39:653-71.

[24] Emslie KR, Ozanne NR, Nade SM. Acute haematogenous osteomyelitis: an experimental model. J Pathol 1983;141:157-67.

[25] Lazzarini L, Mader J, Calhoun J. Osteomyelitis in long bones. J Bone and Joint Surg 2004; 86-A(10):2305-18.

[26] Waldvogel FA, Medoff G, Swartz MN. Osteomyelitis: a review of clinical features, therapeutic considerations and unusual aspects. N Engl J Med 1970;282:198-206.

[27] Dormans J, Drummond D. Pediatric hematogenous osteomyelitis: new trends in presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1994;2:333-41.

[28] Nixon GW. Hematogenous osteomyelitis of metaphyseal-equivalent locations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978;130:123.

[29] Howard CB, Einhorn M, Dagan R, et al. Fine-needle bone biopsy to diagnose osteomyelitis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994;76:311.

[30] Mackowiak PA, Jones SR, Smith JW. Diagnostic value of sinus-tract cultures in chronic osteomyelitis. JAMA 1978;239:2772-5.

[31] Willis RB, Rozencwaig R. Pediatric osteomyelitis masquerading as skeletal neoplasia. Orthop Clin N Am 1996;27:625.

[32] Oudjhane K, AzouzEM. Imaging of osteomyelitis in children. Radiol Clin N Am 2001;39: 251-66.

[33] Wenaden A, Szyszko T, Saiffudin A. Imaging of periosteal reactions associated with focal lesions of bone. Clin Radiol 2005;60:439-56.

[34] Boutin R, Brossman J, Sartoris D, et al. Update on imaging of orthopedic infections. Orthop Clin N Am 1998;29:41-66.

[35] Keenan AM, Tindel NL, Alavi A. Diagnosis of pedal osteomyelitis in diabetic patients using current scintigraphic techniques. Arch Intern Med 1989;149:2262-6.

[36] Larcos G, Brown ML, Sutton RT. Diagnosis of osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetic patients: value of 111 In-leukocyte scintigraphy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;157: 527-31.

[37] Yuh WTC, Corson JD, Baraniewski HM, et al. Osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetic patients: evaluation with plain film, 99Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1989;152:795-800.

[38] Elgazzar AH, Abdel-Dayem HM, Clark JD, et al. Multimodality imaging in osteomyelitis. Eur J Nucl Med 1995;22:1043.

[39] Handmaker H, Leonards R. The bone scan in inflammatory osseous disease. Semin Nucl Med 1976;6:95-105.

[40] Maurer AH, Chen DCP, Camargo EE, et al. Utility of three-phase skeletal scintigraphy in suspected osteomyelitis: concise communication. J Nucl Med 1981;22:941-9.

[41] Alazraki N, Dries DJ, Datz F, et al. Value of a 24 hour image four phase scan in assessing osteomyelitis in patients with peripheral vascular disease. J Nucl Med 1985;26:711-7.

[42] Schauwecker DS. The scintigraphic diagnosis of osteomyelitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992;158:9-18.

[43] Seldin DW, Heiken JP, Feldman F, et al. Effect of soft tissue pathology on detection of pedal osteomyelitis in diabetes. J Nucl Med 1985;26:988-93.

[44] Termaat MF, Raijmakers PG, Scholtein HJ, et al. The accuracy of diagnostic imaging for the assesment of chronic osteomyelitis: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg 2005;87-A(11):2464-71.

[45] Johnson JE, Kennedy EJ, Shereff MJ, et al. Prospective study of bone indium-111-labeled white blood cell, gallium-67 scanning for the evaluation osteomyelitis in diabetic foot. Foot Ankle Int 1996;17:10-6.

[46] Palestro CJ, Chun CK, Swyer AJ, et al. Radionuclide diagnosis of vertebral osteomyelitis: indium-111 leukocyte and technetium-99m-methylene diphosphonate bone scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 1991;32:1861-5.

[47] Peters AM. The use of nuclear medicine in infections. Br J Radiol 1998;71:252-61.

[48] Williamson SL, Seibert JJ, Glasier CM, et al. Ultrasound in advance pediatric osteomyelitis. Pediatr Radiol 1991;21:288-90.

[49] McCarthy K, Velchik MG, Alavi A, et al. In-111 labeled white blood cells in detection of osteomyelitis complicated by a pre-existing condition. J Nucl Med 1988;29:1015-21.

[50] Al-Sheikh W, Sfakianakis GN, Mnaymneh W, et al. Subacute and chronic bone infections: diagnosis using In-111, Ga-67 and Tc-99m MDP bone scintigraphy and radiography. Radiology 1985;155:501-6.

[51] Schauwecker DS, Burt RW, Park HW, et al. Evaluation of complicating osteomyelitis with Tc-99m MDP, In-111 granulocytes, and Ga-67 citrate. J Nucl Med 1984;25: 848-53.

[52] Tumeh SS, Aliabadi P, Weissman BN, et al. Chronic osteomyelitis: bone and gallium scan patterns associated with active disease. Radiology 1986;158:685-8.

[53] Lewin JS, Rosenfield NS, Hoffer PB, et al. Acute osteomyelitis in children: combined Tc-9m and Ga-67 imaging. Radiology 1986;158:795.

[54] Merkel KD, Brown ML, Dewanjee MK, et al. Comparison of Indium-labeled leukocyte imaging with sequential technetium-gallium scanning in diagnosis of low grade musculoskeletal sepsis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985;67:465-76.

[55] Galperine T, Dutronc H, Lafarie S, et al. Cold bone defecto on granulocytes labelled with technetium-99m-HMPAO Scintigraphy: significance and usefulness for diagnosis and follow-up of osteoarticular infections. Scand J Infect Dis 2004;36:209-12.

[56] Kumar VQ. Radiolabeled white blood cells and direct targeting of micro-organisms for infection imaging. J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49:325-38.

[57] Jaramillo D, Treves ST, Kasser J, et al. Osteomyelitis and septic arthritis in children: appropriate use of imaging to guide treatment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995;165:399-403.

[58] Singh B, Mittal BR, Bhattacharya A, et al. Technetium-99m ciprofloxacin imaging in the diagnosis of postsurgical bony infection and evaluation and the response to antibiotic therapy: a case report. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2005;13(2):190-4.

[59] Sing AK. 99mTc-4flouroquinolone: evaluation as a specific infection imaging agent. Indian J Nucl Med 1997;12:148.

[60] Britton KE, Wareham DW, Das SS, et al. Imaging bacterial infection with 99mTc-ciproflox-acin (Infecton). J Clin Pathol 2002;55:817-23.

[61] Britton KE, Vinjamuri S, Hall AV, et al. Clinical evaluation of technetium —99m Infecton for the localization of bacterial infection. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24:553-6.

[62] Malamitsi J, Giamarellou H, Kanellakopoulou K, et al. Infecton: a 99mTc-ciprofloxacin radiopharmaceutical for the detection of bone infection. Clin Microbiol Infect 2003;9: 101-9.

[63] Siaens RH, Rennen HJ, Boerman OC, et al. Synthesis and comparison of 99mTc-enroflox-acin and 99mTc-ciprofloxacin. J Nucl Med 2005;45(12):2088-94.

[64] Rubello D, Casara D, Maran A, Avogaro A, Tiengo A, Muzzio P. Role of antigranulocyte Fab fragment antibody scintigraphy (Leukoscan) in evaluating bone infection: acquisition protocol, interpretation criteria and clinical results. Nucl Med Commun 2004;25:39-47.

[65] Lazzeri E, Pauwels E, Erba P, et al. Clinical feasibility of two-step streptavidin/111In-biotin scintigraphy in patients with suspected vertebral osteomyelitis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:1505-11.

[66] Love C, Tomas M, Tronco G, et al. FDG PET of infection and inflammation. Radiographics 2005;25(5):1357-68.

[67] Vinjamuri S, Hall AV, Solanki K, et al. Comparison of Tc-99m infecton imaging with radiolabelled white-cell imaging in the evaluation of bacterial infection. Lancet 1996;347: 233-5.

[68] Aliabadi P, Nikpoor N. Imaging osteomyelitis. Arthritis Rheumatol 1994;37:617.

[69] Ram PC, Martinez S, Korobin M, et al. CT detection of intraosseous gas: a new sign of osteomyelitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1981;137:721-3.

[70] Gold R, Hawkins R, Katz R. Bacterial osteomyelitis: findings on plain radiography, CT MR and scintigraphy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;157:365-70.

[71] Helms C, Jeffrey RB, Wing V. Computed tomography and plain film appearance of bony sequestration: significance and differential diagnosis. Skel Radiol 1987;16:117.

[72] Spaeth HJ, Chandnani VP, Beltran J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging detection of early experimental periostitis: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and plain radiography with histopathological correlation. Invest Radiol 1991;26:304-8.

[73] Bohndorf K. Infection of the appendicular skeleton. Eur Radiol 2004;14:E53-63.

[74] Cardinal E, Bureau NJ, Aubin B, et al. Role of ultrasound in musculoskeletal infections. Radiol Clin North Am 2001;39:191-201.

[75] Riebel TW, Nasir R, Nazarenko O. The value of sonography in the detection of osteomyelitis. Pediatr Radiol 1996;26:291-7.

[76] Albiri MM, Kirpekar M, Ablow RC. Osteomyelitis: detection with US. Radiology 1989; 172:509-14.

[77] Howard CB, Einhorn M, Dagan R, et al. Ultrasound diagnosis and management of acute hematogenous osteomyelitis in children. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993;75-B:79-82.

[78] Bureau N, Chhem R, Cardinal E. Musculoskeletal infections: US manifestations. Radio-graphics 1999;19:1585-92.

[79] Rifai A, Nyman R. Scintigraphy and ultrasonography in differentiating osteomyelitis from bone infarction in sickle cell disease. Acta Radiol 1997;38:139.

[80] Chau CLF, Griffith JF. Musculoskeletal infections: ultrasound appearances. Clin Radiol 2005;60:149-59.

[81] Blickman JG, van Die CE, de Rooy JW. Current imaging concepts in pediatric osteomielitis. Eur Radiol 2004;14:L55-64.

[82] Venkatesh S, Riederer B, Chhem R, et al. Reactivation in post-traumatic chronic osteomyelitis: ultrasonographic findings. Can Assoc Radiol 2003;54:163-8.

[83] Chhem RK, Kaplan PA, Dussault RG. Ultrasonography of the musculoskeletal system. Radiol Clin North Am 1994;32:275-89.

[84] Kocher M, Lee B, Dolan M, et al. Pediatric orthopedic infections: early detection and treatment. Pediatr Ann 2006;35:112-22.

[85] William RR, Hussein SS, Jeans WD, et al. A prospective study of soft-tissue ultrasonography in sickle cell disease patients with suspected osteomyelitis. Clin Radiol 2000;5:307-10.

[86] Unger E, Moldofsky P, Gatenby R, et al. Diagnosis of osteomyelitis by MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1988;150:605-10.

[87] Connolly LP, Connolly SA, Drubach LA, et al. Acute hematogenous osteomyelitis of children: assessment of skeletal scintigraphy-based diagnosis in the era of MRI. J Nucl Med 2002;43:1310-6.

[88] Jevtic V. Vertebral infection. Eur Radiol 2004;14:E43-52.

[89] Fletcher BD, Scoles PV, Nelson AD. Osteomyelitis in children: detection by magnetic resonance. Radiology 1984;150:57-60.

[90] Modic MT, Pavlicek W, Weinstein MA. Magnetic resonance imaging of intervertebral disk disease: clinical and pulse sequences considerations. Radiology 1984;152: 103-11.

[91] Modic MT, Feiglin DH, Piraino DW, et al. Vertebral osteomyelitis: assessment using MR. Radiology 1985;157:157-66.

[92] Modic MT, Pflanze W, Feiglin DHI, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of musculoskeletal infections. Radiol Clin N Am 1986;24:247-58.

[93] Theodorou DJ, Theodorou SJ, Kakitsubata Y, et al. Imaging characteristics and epidemi-ologic features of atypical mycobacterial infections involving the musculoskeletal system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:341-9.

[94] Flemming D, Murphey M, McCarthy K. Imaging of the foot and ankle: summary and update. Curr Opin Orthop 2005;16:54-9.

[95] Dangman B, Hoffer F, Rand F, et al. Osteomyelitis in children: gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1992;182:743.

[96] Chandnani VP, Beltran J, Morris CS, et al. Acute experimental osteomyelitis and abscesses: detection with MR imaging vs. CT. Radiology 1990;174:233-6.

[97] Towers JD. The use of intravenous contrast in MRI of extremity infection. Semin US CT Magn Reson Imaging 1997;18:269-75.

[98] Stover B, Sigmund G, Langer M, et al. MRI in diagnostic evaluation of osteomyelitis in children. Eur Radiol 1994;4:347-52.

[99] Mandell GA. Imaging in the diagnosis of the musculoskeletal infections in children. Curr Probl Pediatr 1996;26:218-37.

[100] Baker LL, Goodman S, Perkash I. Benign versus pathologic compression fractures of vertebral bodies: assessment with conventional spin-echo, chemical shift and STIR MR imaging. Radiology 1990;174:495-502.

[101] Bobman SA, Scott A, Listerud J. Postoperative lumbar spine: contrast enhanced chemical shift MR imaging. Radiology 1991;179:557-62.

[102] Fritz RC, Stoller DW. Fat-supression MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology 1992; 185:614-5.

[103] Georgy A, Hesselink JR. Evaluation of fat suppression in contrast-enhanced MR of neoplastic and inflammatory spine disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994;15: 409-17.

[104] Harned EM, Mitchell DG, Burk DL Jr, et al. Bone marrow findings on MR images of the knee: accentuation by fat suppression. J Magn Reson Imaging 1990;8:27-31.

[105] Hernandez RJ, Keim DR, Chenevert TL, et al. Fat-supressed MR imaging of myositis. Radiology 1992;182:217-9.

[106] Huang AB, Schweitzer ME, Hume E, et al. Osteomyelitis of the pelvis/hips in paralyzed patients: accuracy and clinical utility of MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998; 22:437-43.

[107] Jones KM, Schwartz B, Mantello W. Fast spin-echo MR in the detection of vertebral metastases: comparison of three sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994;15:401-7.

[108] Mitchell DG, Joseph PM, Fallon M, etal. Chemical shift imaging of the femoral head: an in vitro study of normal hips and hips with avascular necrosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987; 148:1159-64.

[109] Morrison WB, Schweitzer ME, Bock GW, et al. Diagnosis of osteomyelitis: utility of fat suppressed contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1993;189:251-7.

[110] Quinn SF, Sheley RC, Demlow TA, et al. Rotator cuff tendon tears: evaluation with fat-supressed MR imaging with arthroscopic correlation in 100 patients. Radiology 1995; 195:497-501.

[111] Rose PM, Demlow T, Szumowski J, et al. Chondromalacia patellae: fat suppressed MR imaging. Radiology 1994;193:437-40.

[112] Totterman S, Weiss SL, Szumowski J, etal. MR fat suppression technique in the evaluation of normal structures of the knee. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1989;13:473-9.

[113] Chung T. Magnetic resonance imaging in acute osteomyelitis in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2002;22:869-70.

[114] Tehranzadeh J, Wong E, Wang F, et al. Imaging of osteomyelitis in the mature skeleton. Radiol Clin N Am 2001;39:223-50.

[115] Rubin HB, Fischman AJ. The use of radiolabeled nonspecific immunoglobulin in the detection of focal inflammation. Semin Nucl Med 1994;24:169-79.

[116] Erdman WA, Tamburro F, Jayson HT, et al. Osteomyelitis: characteristics and pitfalls of diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiology 1991;180:533-9.

[117] Jones KM, Unger EC, Granstrom P, et al. Bone marrow imaging using STIR at 0.5 and 1.5 T. Magn Reson Imaging 1992;10:169-76.

[118] Davies AM, Hughes DE, Grimer RJ. Intramedullary and extramedullary fat globules on magnetic resonance imaging as a diagnostic sign for osteomyelitis. Eur Radiol 2005;15: 2194-9.

[119] Poyhia T, Azouz EM. MR imaging evaluation of subacute and chronic bone abscesses in children. Pediatr Radiol 2000;30:763-8.

Was this article helpful?

0 0
Arthritis Relief and Prevention

Arthritis Relief and Prevention

This report may be oh so welcome especially if theres no doctor in the house Take Charge of Your Arthritis Now in less than 5-Minutes the time it takes to make an appointment with your healthcare provider Could you use some help understanding arthritis Maybe a little gentle, bedside manner in your battle for joint pain relief would be great Well, even if you are not sure if arthritis is the issue with you or your friend or loved one.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment