Cited by 9Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementOrthopedic Infections and TreatmentsFoot and Ankle Surgery

X-ray versus magnetic resonance imaging in diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a clinical comparison.

Open access
Gariani, Karim, Lebowitz, Dan, Kressmann, Benjamin, Gariani, Joanna, Uçkay, Ilker·2021·Current Diabetes Reviews

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Radiographic imaging is an important diagnostic tool in diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). It is unknown whether DFO cases diagnosed with conventional X-ray versus positive Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) differ regarding epidemiology and treatment outcome. Theoretically, signs of inflammation on MRI without bone lesions might be easier to treat. METHODS: Our clinical pathway for diabetic foot infections discourages the use of MRI for the diagnosis of DFO. We compared the epidemiology and therapy of non-amputated DFO with positive features on conventional X-ray, MRI, or both. Radiology specialists interpreted the images. The intraoperative aspect of bone during amputation and the results of bone cultures were considered the gold standard for DFO diagnosis. RESULTS: We prospectively followed 390 DFO episodes in 186 adult patients for a median of 2.9 years and performed 318 conventional X-rays (median costs 100 Swiss Francs; 100 US$) and 47 (47/390; 12%) MRI scans (median 800 Swiss Francs; 800 US $). Among them, 18 episodes were associated with positive MRI findings but lacked bone lesions on X-ray. After debridement, the median duration of systemic antibiotics was 28 days for MRI-only episodes and 30 days for X-ray-positive cases (Wilcoxonranksum- test; p=0.26). The corresponding median numbers of surgical debridements were 1 and 1; and recurrence was witnessed in 25% and 28%, respectively. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, MRI-only episodes did not alter the remission rate (odds ratio 0.5, 95%CI 0.1-5.2). CONCLUSION: According to our clinical pathway, DFO episodes with positive MRI findings only did not differ epidemiologically from the remaining DFO cases and did not influence the choice of therapy nor remission rate.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2174/1573399816999200729124134

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most wound classification systems focus on the degree of tissue loss, with less emphasis on concomitant infection or ischemia.

    “Although there are numerous wound classification systems, most focus on the degree of tissue loss, with less emphasis on concomitant infection or ischemia.36,37”

    From Diabetic Foot Ulcers (2023) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Methods and General results and treatment sections discuss imaging criteria and characteristics of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, not wound classification systems. Searches for tissue loss, infection, ischemia, and wound-grading systems found no passage comparing what those systems emphasize. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cortés-Penfield NW, Kulkarni PA. The History of Antibiotic Treatment of Osteomyelitis. Open Forum Infect Dis 2019; 6(5)ofz181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz181 PMID: 31123692 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gariani, K., Lebowitz, D., Kressmann, B., Gariani, J., & Uçkay, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Geneva (CH)
  • University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
  • Clinical Pathway of Diabetic Foot Infections, University of Geneva Hospitals and Medical School, 1211 Geneva,Switzerland
Corresponding author
Gariani, Karim
Venue
Current Diabetes Reviews
Published
2021-03
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
373-377
ISSN
1573-3998 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3046862545
Cited by
9
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Diabetes Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Orthopedic Infections and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Foot and Ankle Surgery
Keywords
diabetic foot osteomyelitis, magnetic resonance imaging, conventional X-ray, diagnostic imaging comparison, bone lesions, bone culture, amputation, surgical debridement, antibiotic duration, recurrence, remission, imaging costs
MeSH terms
Adult, Amputation, Surgical, Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Osteomyelitis, X-Rays, Diabetic Foot

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review