Open Access

Comparison of diagnostic performance of X‑ray, CT and MRI in patients with surgically confirmed subtle Lisfranc injuries

  • Authors:
    • Lubo Tang
    • Wen Zhou
    • Lu Bai
    • Chenxi Wu
    • Changyue Xiong
    • Yuxin Yan
    • Sumeng Chen
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: February 29, 2024     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2024.12462
  • Article Number: 174
  • Copyright: © Tang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of three imaging tests: X‑ray, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for subtle Lisfranc injuries and three anatomical subtype injuries. The non‑weight‑bearing X‑ray, CT and MRI imaging results of patients with subtle Lisfranc injuries from September 2013 to March 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Subtle Lisfranc injuries and three anatomical subtypes (first, second and cuneiform rays) were diagnosed based on the surgical reports. The diagnostic performance of X‑ray, CT and MRI was compared. The sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value, negative predictive value, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and κ coefficient were reported. A total of 31 patients were included in the study. The correct diagnosis was made in 48.4% (15/31), 87.1% (27/31) and 96.8% (30/31) of patients by X‑ray, CT and MRI, respectively. A total of 54 different anatomical injuries were found intraoperatively in all patients, with MRI and CT having high agreement (Sn, 72.2 and 87.0%; κ, 0.69 and 0.78, respectively) and X‑ray having a low agreement (Sn, 29.6%; κ, 0.26) with the surgical findings. Regarding the first‑ray injuries, CT had the highest Sn (76.9%), Sp (100%) and AUC (0.885) in diagnosing subtle Lisfranc injuries. MRI showed the best Sn (88.5 and 93.3%, respectively) and AUC (0.942 and 0.904, respectively) in both second and cuneiform rays. In conclusion, non‑weight‑bearing X‑rays had poor diagnostic accuracy for subtle Lisfranc injuries and their subtypes. CT was superior to X‑rays and MRI in diagnosing first‑ray injuries. Although not significantly different from CT in terms of overall diagnosis, MRI was superior to X‑ray and CT in diagnosing second and cuneiform‑ray injuries.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

April-2024
Volume 27 Issue 4

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Tang L, Zhou W, Bai L, Wu C, Xiong C, Yan Y and Chen S: Comparison of diagnostic performance of X‑ray, CT and MRI in patients with surgically confirmed subtle Lisfranc injuries. Exp Ther Med 27: 174, 2024
APA
Tang, L., Zhou, W., Bai, L., Wu, C., Xiong, C., Yan, Y., & Chen, S. (2024). Comparison of diagnostic performance of X‑ray, CT and MRI in patients with surgically confirmed subtle Lisfranc injuries. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 27, 174. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2024.12462
MLA
Tang, L., Zhou, W., Bai, L., Wu, C., Xiong, C., Yan, Y., Chen, S."Comparison of diagnostic performance of X‑ray, CT and MRI in patients with surgically confirmed subtle Lisfranc injuries". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 27.4 (2024): 174.
Chicago
Tang, L., Zhou, W., Bai, L., Wu, C., Xiong, C., Yan, Y., Chen, S."Comparison of diagnostic performance of X‑ray, CT and MRI in patients with surgically confirmed subtle Lisfranc injuries". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 27, no. 4 (2024): 174. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2024.12462