TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic accuracy of MRI for identifying posterior element bone stress injury in athletes with low back pain: a systematic review and narrative synthesis
AU - Esh, Roy
AU - Grødahl, Linn Helen J
AU - Kerslake, Robert
AU - Strachan, Kate
AU - Spencer, Simon
AU - Fawcett, Louise
AU - Rushton, Alison
AU - Heneghan, Nicola R
N1 - © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2020/10/2
Y1 - 2020/10/2
N2 - Objective To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for identifying posterior element bone stress injury (PEBSI) in the athletic population with low back pain (LBP). Study Design A systematic review searched for published sources up until July 2020. Eligibility criteria: prospective cohort design, MRI diagnosis, adolescents/young adults, chief symptoms of LBP, PEBSI as the clinical diagnosis and SPECT-CT as reference standard. Risk of bias and overall quality were assessed using QUADAS-2 and GRADE, respectively. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Results Four studies were included, with three included in the quantitative synthesis. Compared with SPECT-CT, two studies involving MRI demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 100%, and 88% and 97%, respectively. Compared with CT, one study involving MRI demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 97% and 91%, respectively. Risk of bias was moderate to high although consistency across studies was noted. Conclusion Findings support further research to consider MRI as the modality of choice for diagnosing PEBSI. MRI was consistent with SPECT-CT for ruling-in PEBSI, but the clinical value of cases where MRI had false negatives remains uncertain due to possible over-sensitivity by SPECT-CT. PROSPERO registration number CRD42015023979.
AB - Objective To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for identifying posterior element bone stress injury (PEBSI) in the athletic population with low back pain (LBP). Study Design A systematic review searched for published sources up until July 2020. Eligibility criteria: prospective cohort design, MRI diagnosis, adolescents/young adults, chief symptoms of LBP, PEBSI as the clinical diagnosis and SPECT-CT as reference standard. Risk of bias and overall quality were assessed using QUADAS-2 and GRADE, respectively. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Results Four studies were included, with three included in the quantitative synthesis. Compared with SPECT-CT, two studies involving MRI demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 100%, and 88% and 97%, respectively. Compared with CT, one study involving MRI demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 97% and 91%, respectively. Risk of bias was moderate to high although consistency across studies was noted. Conclusion Findings support further research to consider MRI as the modality of choice for diagnosing PEBSI. MRI was consistent with SPECT-CT for ruling-in PEBSI, but the clinical value of cases where MRI had false negatives remains uncertain due to possible over-sensitivity by SPECT-CT. PROSPERO registration number CRD42015023979.
KW - Athlete
KW - Back injuries
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Evidence based review
KW - MRI
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093532976&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000764
DO - 10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000764
M3 - Article
C2 - 33088582
SN - 2055-7647
VL - 6
JO - BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine
JF - BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine
IS - 1
M1 - e000764
ER -