HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Related articles in JNM Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Love, C. Articles by Palestro, C. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Love, C. Articles by Palestro, C. J.

Diagnosing Infection in the Failed Joint Replacement: A Comparison of Coincidence Detection ¹⁸F-FDG and ¹¹¹In-Labeled Leukocyte/^99mTc-Sulfur Colloid Marrow Imaging

¹ Division of Nuclear Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York
² Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York
³ Department of Orthopedic Surgery, North Shore University Hospital at Glen Cove, Glen Cove, New York

The objectives of this study were to investigate ¹⁸F-FDG imaging, using a coincidence detection system, for diagnosing prosthetic joint infection and to compare it with combined ¹¹¹In-labeled leukocyte/^99mTc-sulfur colloid marrow imaging in patients with failed lower extremity joint replacements. Methods: Fifty-nine patients—with painful, failed, lower extremity joint prostheses, 40 hip and 19 knee—who underwent ¹⁸F-FDG, labeled leukocyte, and bone marrow imaging, and had histopathologic and microbiologic confirmation of the final diagnosis, formed the basis of this investigation. ¹⁸F-FDG images were interpreted as positive for infection using 4 different criteria: criterion 1: any periprosthetic activity, regardless of location or intensity; criterion 2: periprosthetic activity on the ¹⁸F-FDG image, without corresponding activity on the marrow image; criterion 3: only bone–prosthesis interface activity, regardless of intensity; criterion 4: semiquantitative analysis—a lesion-to-background ratio was generated, and the cutoff value yielding the highest accuracy for determining the presence of infection was determined. Labeled leukocyte/marrow images were interpreted as positive for infection when periprosthetic activity was present on the labeled leukocyte image without corresponding activity on the marrow image. Results: Twenty-five (42%) prostheses, 14 hip and 11 knee, were infected. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ¹⁸F-FDG, by criterion, were as follows: criterion 1: 100%, 9%, 47%; criterion 2: 96%, 35%, 61%; criterion 3: 52%, 44%, 47%; criterion 4: 36%, 97%, 71%. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of labeled leukocyte/marrow imaging were 100%, 91%, and 95%, respectively. WBC/marrow imaging, which was more accurate than any of the ¹⁸F-FDG criteria for all prostheses, as well as for hips and knees separately, was significantly more sensitive than criterion 3 (P < 0.001) and criterion 4 (P < 0.001) and was significantly more specific than criterion 1 (P < 0.001), criterion 2 (P < 0.001), and criterion 3 (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Regardless of how the images are interpreted, coincidence detection–based ¹⁸F-FDG imaging is less accurate than, and cannot replace, labeled leukocyte/marrow imaging for diagnosing infection of the failed prosthetic joint.

Key Words: prosthetic joint infection • coincidence detection • ¹⁸F-FDG • ¹¹¹In-labeled leukocytes

Related articles in JNM:

THIS MONTH IN JNM

JNM 2004 45: 8A-9A. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				V. Mandalia, K. Eyres, P. Schranz, and A. D. Toms Evaluation of patients with a painful total knee replacement J Bone Joint Surg Br, March 1, 2008; 90-B(3): 265 - 271. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Kumar, S. Basu, D. Torigian, V. Anand, H. Zhuang, and A. Alavi Role of Modern Imaging Techniques for Diagnosis of Infection in the Era of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Clin. Microbiol. Rev., January 1, 2008; 21(1): 209 - 224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Parvizi, E. Ghanem, S. Menashe, R. L. Barrack, and T. W. Bauer Periprosthetic Infection: What Are the Diagnostic Challenges? J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., December 1, 2006; 88(suppl_4): 138 - 147. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. J. Palestro, C. Love, G. G. Tronco, M. B. Tomas, and J. N. Rini Combined labeled leukocyte and technetium 99m sulfur colloid bone marrow imaging for diagnosing musculoskeletal infection. RadioGraphics, May 1, 2006; 26(3): 859 - 870. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. W. Bauer, J. Parvizi, N. Kobayashi, and V. Krebs Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Infection J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., April 1, 2006; 88(4): 869 - 882. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. P. Bleeker-Rovers, F. J. Vos, G. J.A. Wanten, J. W.M. van der Meer, F. H.M. Corstens, B.-J. Kullberg, and W. J.G. Oyen 18F-FDG PET in Detecting Metastatic Infectious Disease J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2005; 46(12): 2014 - 2019. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Love, M. B. Tomas, G. G. Tronco, and C. J. Palestro FDG PET of Infection and Inflammation RadioGraphics, September 1, 2005; 25(5): 1357 - 1368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]