Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2008 Aug 15;47(4):519-27.
doi: 10.1086/590011.

Diagnostic accuracy of the physical examination and imaging tests for osteomyelitis underlying diabetic foot ulcers: meta-analysis

Marie T Dinh  1 , Cybele L Abad, Nasia Safdar
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic accuracy of the physical examination and imaging tests for osteomyelitis underlying diabetic foot ulcers: meta-analysis

Marie T Dinh et al. Clin Infect Dis. .

Abstract

Accurate diagnosis of osteomyelitis underlying diabetic foot ulcers is essential to optimize outcomes. We undertook a meta-analysis of the accuracy of diagnostic tests for osteomyelitis in diabetic patients with foot ulcers. Pooled sensitivity and specificity, the summary measure of accuracy (Q*), and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. Exposed bone or probe-to-bone test had a sensitivity of 0.60 and a specificity of 0.91. Plain radiography had a sensitivity of 0.54 and a specificity of 0.68. MRI had a sensitivity of 0.90 and a specificity of 0.79. Bone scan was found to have a sensitivity of 0.81 and a specificity of 0.28. Leukocyte scan was found to have a sensitivity of 0.74 and a specificity of 0.68. The diagnostic odds ratios for clinical examination, radiography, MRI, bone scan, and leukocyte scan were 49.45, 2.84, 24.36, 2.10, and 10.07, respectively. The presence of exposed bone or a positive probe-to-bone test result is moderately predictive of osteomyelitis. MRI is the most accurate imaging test for diagnosis of osteomyelitis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential conflicts of interest. All authors: no conflicts.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Details of the literature search
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Boulton AJ, Vileikyte L, Ragnarson-Tennvall G, Apelqvist J. The global burden of diabetic foot disease. Lancet 2005;366:1719–24. - PubMed
    1. Boulton AJ, Vileikyte L. The diabetic foot: the scope of the problem. J Fam Pract 2000; 49:S3–8. - PubMed
    1. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Wunderlich RP, Mohler MJ, Wendel CS, Lipsky BA. Risk factors for foot infections in individuals with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2006;29:1288–93. - PubMed
    1. Singh N, Armstrong DG, Lipsky BA. Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. JAMA 2005;293:217–28. - PubMed
    1. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Peters EJ, Lipsky BA. Probe-to-bone test for diagnosing diabetic foot osteomyelitis: reliable or relic? Diabetes Care 2007; 30:270–4. - PubMed

Publication types