The Spine Journal
Volume 8, Issue 6 , Pages 998-1002, November 2008

Reliability and accuracy of fine-cut computed tomography scans to determine the status of anterior interbody fusions with metallic cages

  • Leah Y. Carreon, MD, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Kenton D. Leatherman Spine Center, 210 East Gray Street, Suite 900, Louisville, KY 40202, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Kenton D. Leatherman Spine Center, 210 East Gray Street, Suite 900, Louisville, KY 40202, USA. Tel.: (502) 584-7525; fax: (502) 584-6851.
  • ,
  • Steven D. Glassman, MD

      Affiliations

    • Kenton D. Leatherman Spine Center, 210 East Gray Street, Suite 900, Louisville, KY 40202, USA
    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Suite 1003, Louisville, KY 40202, USA
  • ,
  • James D. Schwender, MD

      Affiliations

    • Twin Cities Spine Center, Piper Building, 913 East 26th Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55404, USA
  • ,
  • Brian R. Subach, MD

      Affiliations

    • The Virginia Spine Institute, 1831 Wiehle Avenue, Second Floor, Reston, VA 20190, USA
  • ,
  • Matthew F. Gornet, MD

      Affiliations

    • The Orthopedic Center of St. Louis, 14825 North Outer Forty Road, Chesterfield, MO 63017, USA
  • ,
  • Shuichiro Ohno, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Suite 1003, Louisville, KY 40202, USA

Received 20 August 2007; received in revised form 20 November 2007; accepted 20 December 2007. published online 15 February 2008.

Abstract 

Background context

Computed tomography (CT) scan has been shown to be more accurate than radiographs in evaluating anterior interbody fusion but may still over-read the extent of fusion.

Purpose

To assess the reliability and accuracy of fine-cut CT scans with reconstructions in evaluating anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with metallic cages using surgical exploration as the reference standard.

Study design

Accuracy of a diagnostic test referenced to the gold standard.

Patient sample

A total of 49 patients and 69 surgical levels.

Outcome measures

Evaluation of fine-cut CT scans for evidence of fusion with subsequent surgical exploration as the reference standard.

Methods

Forty-nine patients who underwent ALIF with metallic cages over 69 levels, who had a fine-cut CT scan before revision were included. Five spine surgeons unaware of the findings on surgical exploration evaluated pre-revision CT scans, classified these as fused or not; and determined the presence of a “sentinel sign” and a “posterior sentinel sign.” Kappa coefficients for interobserver reliability, sensitivity, and specificity to detect fusion were determined.

Results

There were 26 males and 23 females with a mean age of 43 years. There were 27 smokers. Average time from index to revision surgery was 22 months. Interobserver kappa for classification as fused or not was 0.25 with 70% to 97% sensitivity and 28% to 85% specificity. The interobserver kappa for the sentinel sign was 0.34 with 13% to 33% sensitivity and 77% to 92% specificity. The interobserver kappa for the posterior sentinel sign was 0.23 with 33% to 87% sensitivity and 56% to 90% specificity.

Conclusions

Raters generally overstated fusion with low specificities across raters and low consensus specificity. Overall accuracy of the posterior sentinel sign (74%) was higher than the sentinel sign (61%). The low kappa value indicates fair reliability. In patients with metallic interbody devices, surgeons should be cautious about interpreting the findings on fine-cut CT scans whether using a general assessment of the fusion, the sentinel sign, or the posterior sentinel sign.

Keywords: Diagnostic reliability, Diagnostic accuracy, Computed tomography, Lumbar fusion, Anterior spine fusion

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Research support received from the Lumbar Spine Study Group through Medtronic Sofamor Danek and from Norton Healthcare.

 FDA device/drug status: not applicable.

 Authors acknowledge a financial relationship (research support from Medtronic Sofamor Danek [SDG], consultants for Medtronic Sofamor Danek [BRS, JDS, and SDG], stockholder and board member of Pioneer K2 [MFG], other support from Medtronic Sofamor Danek [JDS and SDG] and other support from Stryker [MFG]), which may indirectly relate to the subject of this research.

PII: S1529-9430(07)01063-7

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2007.12.004

The Spine Journal
Volume 8, Issue 6 , Pages 998-1002, November 2008