↓ Skip to main content

Patterns of bone tracer uptake on SPECT-CT in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with primary total hip arthroplasty

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Patterns of bone tracer uptake on SPECT-CT in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with primary total hip arthroplasty
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00259-017-3827-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thierry Schweizer, Filippo-Franco Schiapparelli, Niccolo Rotigliano, Helmut Rasch, Felix Amsler, Michael T. Hirschmann

Abstract

The primary purpose of this study was to compare bone tracer uptake (BTU) on SPECT/CT in symptomatic and asymptomatic total hip arthroplasty (THA) and identify a possible relationship between BTU patterns and patient's symptoms. The secondary purpose was to investigate if the fixation methods (cemented versus uncemented) lead to different BTU patterns. A total of 58 THAs, 31 symptomatic (group S) and 27 asymptomatic (group AS), were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. All symptomatic patients underwent standardized detailed history, clinical examination, radiographs and 99mTc-HDP SPECT/CT. BTU in SPECT/CT was quantified in three dimensions and anatomically localized in a scheme of quadrants and levels using a customized previously validated software. T tests were used on both quadrants and levels inside and between groups. A Pearson correlation was performed for BTU within the quadrants. An area under receiver operating characteristic curves was drawn in order to find a BTU value that could differentiate the two groups. Within the groups, patients with cemented and uncemented stems were compared for influences on BTU intensity. The causes of pain were identified in 61% of the patients. The most common problem was aseptic loosening (n = 12). In group AS, levels 1, 2 and 5 had similar BTUs. BTUs in these levels were significantly higher than in level 3, 4 and 6. In group S, no significant differences were seen in terms of BTU in level 1-5. However, BTU here was significantly higher than at level 6 (p < 0.001). In both groups, level 1, the superior, had a significantly higher BTU than level 2 (group AS p < 0.01, group S p < 0.05). Comparing the BTU of the two groups among levels, significant differences were found for level 4, level 5 and the entire stem areas (p < 0.05). The ROC curve calculated on the whole stem allowed identification of a BTU ratio of 3.1 that separated the 92.6% patients of group AS with BTU < 3.1 from the 54.8% of patients of group S with a BTU ≥ 3.1. With regards to the fixation technique, only the BTU at the level 6 in group S presented a significant difference between cemented and uncemented stems (p < 0.05). Higher BTU levels significantly correlated with symptoms, but a normal BTU could not exclude a specific pathology after THA. A threshold of BTU in SPECT/CT was identified to distinguish between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients after THA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 19%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Master 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 46%
Unspecified 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Mathematics 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2018.
All research outputs
#16,042,980
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#1,980
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,914
of 319,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#23
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.