Advertisement

Emergency Radiology

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 549–556 | Cite as

Multi-detector CT for suspected hip fragility fractures: A diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Mostafa Alabousi
  • Isabelle D Gauthier
  • Nicole Li
  • Gonçalo MF dos Santos
  • Dmitry Golev
  • Michael N Patlas
  • Abdullah AlabousiEmail author
Review Article
  • 50 Downloads

Abstract

To perform a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of Multi-Detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) for detecting proximal femoral (hip) fragility fractures in patients with a negative initial radiograph. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify relevant studies published between January 2000 and May 2018. Articles underwent title and abstract screening followed by full-text screening. Study inclusion criteria are patients with suspected hip fracture, negative initial radiograph, MDCT as the index test, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or clinical follow-up as the reference standard, and DTA measure as the outcome. Demographic, methodologic, and study outcome data were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. DTA metrics were pooled using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. From an initial 1385 studies, four studies reporting on 418 patients (174 with hip fractures) were included. Pooled summary statistics included the following: sensitivity (87%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 79–93), specificity (98%; 95% CI 95–99), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (0.972). MDCT has a high specificity for detecting hip fragility fractures, comparable to MRI, but a lower sensitivity. Local institutional factors may play a role in whether a patient receives MDCT or MRI, as imaging should not be delayed. If there is ongoing concern for fracture in a patient with a negative MDCT, MRI should be performed. Cautious interpretation of the results is warranted given the risk of bias and small sample size.

Keywords

Hip fractures Multi-detector computed tomography Sensitivity and specificity Meta-analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Stephanie Sanger, the librarian at the McMaster Health Sciences Library, for her assistance in creating the search strategy.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10140_2019_1696_MOESM1_ESM.docx (16 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 15 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Gill SK, Smith J, Fox R, Chesser TJS (2013) Investigation of occult hip fractures: the use of CT and MRI. Sci World J 2013:1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/830319 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brauer CA, Coca-Perraillon M, Cutler DM, Rosen AB (2009) Incidence and mortality of hip fractures in the United States. JAMA 302:1573–1579.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1462 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pincus D, Ravi B, Wasserstein D, Huang A, Paterson JM, Nathens AB, Kreder HJ, Jenkinson RJ, Wodchis WP (2017) Association between wait time and 30-day mortality in adults undergoing hip fracture surgery. JAMA 318:1994–2003.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.17606 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bottle A, Aylin P (2006) Mortality associated with delay in operation after hip fracture: observational study. BMJ 332:947–951.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38790.468519.55 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergeron E, Lavoie A, Moore L, Bamvita JM, Ratte S, Gravel C, Clas D (2006) Is the delay to surgery for isolated hip fracture predictive of outcome in efficient systems? J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care 60:753–757.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ta.0000214649.53190.2a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Novack V, Jotkowitz A, Etzion O, Porath A (2007) Does delay in surgery after hip fracture lead to worse outcomes? A multicenter survey. Int J Qual Heal Care J Int Soc Qual Heal Care 19:170–176.  https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lefaivre KA, Macadam SA, Davidson DJ, Gandhi R, Chan H, Broekhuyse HM (2009) Length of stay, mortality, morbidity and delay to surgery in hip fractures. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 91-B:922–927.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.91B7.22446 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khan SK, Kalra S, Khanna A, Thiruvengada MM, Parker MJ (2009) Timing of surgery for hip fractures: a systematic review of 52 published studies involving 291,413 patients. Injury 40:692–697.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2009.01.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ward RJ, Weissman BN, Kransdorf MJ, Adler R, Appel M, Bancroft LW, Bernard SA, Bruno MA, Fries IB, Morrison WB, Mosher TJ, Roberts CC, Scharf SC, Tuite MJ, Zoga AC (2014) ACR appropriateness criteria acute hip pain-suspected fracture. J Am Coll Radiol 11:114–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2013.10.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cannon J, Silvestri S, Munro M (2009) Imaging choices in occult hip fracture. J Emerg Med 37:144–152.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.12.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dominguez S, Liu P, Roberts C, Mandell M, Richman PB (2005) Prevalence of traumatic hip and pelvic fractures in patients with suspected hip fracture and negative initial standard radiographs—a study of emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med 12:366–369.  https://doi.org/10.1197/j.aem.2004.10.024 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hakkarinen DK, Banh KV, Hendey GW (2012) Magnetic resonance imaging identifies occult hip fractures missed by 64-slice computed tomography. J Emerg Med 43:303–307.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.01.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cabarrus MC, Ambekar A, Lu Y, Link TM (2008) MRI and CT of insufficiency fractures of the pelvis and the proximal femur. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:995–1001.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3714 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lubovsky O, Liebergall M, Mattan Y, Weil Y, Mosheiff R (2005) Early diagnosis of occult hip fractures MRI versus CT scan. Injury 36:788–792.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2005.01.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rehman H, Clement RGE, Perks F, White TO (2016) Imaging of occult hip fractures: CT or MRI? Injury 47:1297–1301.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.02.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Handbook for DTA reviews Cochrane screening and diagnostic tests. https://methods.cochrane.org/sdt/handbook-dta-reviews. Accessed 1 Dec 2018
  17. 17.
    McInnes MDF, Bossuyt PMM (2015) Pitfalls of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in imaging research. Radiology 277:13–21.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015142779 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McGrath TA, McInnes MDF, Korevaar DA, Bossuyt PMM (2016) Meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy in imaging journals: analysis of pooling techniques and their effect on summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 281:78–85.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016152229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McGrath TA, Alabousi M, Skidmore B et al (2017) Recommendations for reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy: a systematic review. Syst Rev 6(194):194.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0590-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McGrath TA, McInnes MDF, Langer FW et al (2017) Treatment of multiple test readers in diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews-meta-analyses of imaging studies. Eur J Radiol 93:59–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.05.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD et al (2018) Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. JAMA 319:388–396.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crijns TJ, Janssen SJ, Davis JT, Ring D, Sanchez HB, Althausen P, Amini MH, Appleton P, Babis GC, Babst RH, Ballas EG, Barquet A, Begue T, Bishop J, Borris LC, Buckley R, Chesser T, Choudhari P, Cornell C, Crist BD, DeCoster TA, Elias N, Frihagen F, Garnavos C, Giordano V, Haverlag R, Havlicek T, Hurwit S, Ibrahim EF, Iyer VM, Jenkinson R, Jeray K, Kabir K, Kanakaris NK, Klostermann C, Kreder HJ, Kreis BE, Kristan A, Lygdas P, McGraw I, Mica L, Mirck B, Moreta-Suarez J, Morgan SJ, Nikolaou VS, Omara T, Pesantez R, Pirpiris M, Poelhekke LMSJ, Pountos I, Prayson M, Quell M, Rodríguez-Roiz JM, Satora W, Schandelmaier P, Schepers T, Short NL, Smith RM, Spoor AB, Stojkovska Pemovska E, Swiontkowski M, Taitsman L, Tosounidis T, Tyllianakis M, van bergen CJA, van de Sande MAJ, van Helden SH, Verbeek DO, Wascher DC, Weil Y (2018) Reliability of the classification of proximal femur fractures: does clinical experience matter? Injury 49:819–823.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2018.02.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, Leeflang MM, Sterne JA, Bossuyt PM, QUADAS-2 Group (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 155:529–536.  https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A (2006) Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:31.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AWS, Scholten RJPM, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH (2005) Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 58:982–990.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Haubro M, Stougaard C, Torfing T, Overgaard S (2015) Sensitivity and specificity of CT- and MRI-scanning in evaluation of occult fracture of the proximal femur. Injury 46:1557–1561.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2015.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mandell JC, Weaver MJ, Khurana B (2018) Computed tomography for occult fractures of the proximal femur, pelvis, and sacrum in clinical practice: single institution, dual-site experience. Emerg Radiol 25:265–273.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-018-1580-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sadozai Z, Davies R, Warner J (2016) The sensitivity of ct scans in diagnosing occult femoral neck fractures. Injury 47:2769–2771.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.10.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thomas RW, Williams HLM, Carpenter EC, Lyons K (2016) The validity of investigating occult hip fractures using multidetector CT. Br J Radiol 89:20150250.  https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20150250 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim S-J, Ahn J, Kim HK, Kim JH (2015) Is magnetic resonance imaging necessary in isolated greater trochanter fracture? A systemic review and pooled analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 16(395):395.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0857-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ross AB, Chan BY, Yi PH, Repplinger MD, Vanness DJ, Lee KS (2019) Diagnostic accuracy of an abbreviated MRI protocol for detecting radiographically occult hip and pelvis fractures in the elderly. Skelet Radiol 48:103–108.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-018-3004-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Deleanu B, Prejbeanu R, Tsiridis E, Vermesan D, Crisan D, Haragus H, Predescu V, Birsasteanu F (2015) Occult fractures of the proximal femur: imaging diagnosis and management of 82 cases in a regional trauma center. World J Emerg Surg 10:55.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-015-0049-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yun BJ, Myriam Hunink MG, Prabhakar AM, Heng M, Liu SW, Qudsi R, Raja AS (2016) Diagnostic imaging strategies for occult hip fractures: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. Acad Emerg Med 23:1161–1169.  https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ftouh S, Morga A, Swift C, Guideline Development Group (2011) Management of hip fracture in adults: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ 342:d3304–d3304.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d3304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wendt K, Heim D, Josten C, Kdolsky R, Oestern HJ, Palm H, Sintenie JB, Komadina R, Copuroglu C (2016) Recommendations on hip fractures. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 42:425–431.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-016-0684-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Papanicolas I, Woskie LR, Jha AK (2018) Health care spending in the United States and other high-income countries. JAMA 319:1024–1039.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.1150 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Keeney JA, Nunley RM, Adelani M, Mall N (2014) Magnetic resonance imaging of the hip: poor cost utility for treatment of adult patients with hip pain. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:787–792.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3431-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society of Emergency Radiology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mostafa Alabousi
    • 1
  • Isabelle D Gauthier
    • 2
  • Nicole Li
    • 2
  • Gonçalo MF dos Santos
    • 2
  • Dmitry Golev
    • 3
  • Michael N Patlas
    • 4
  • Abdullah Alabousi
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyMcMaster University, Juravinski HospitalHamiltonCanada
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyMcMaster University, Hamilton General HospitalHamiltonCanada
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyMcMaster University, St. Joseph’s HealthcareHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations