Radionuclide Imaging of Musculoskeletal Infection: Conventional Agents

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

The diagnosis of musculoskeletal infection can be clinically challenging, and radionuclide imaging is often performed as part of the diagnostic workup. Conventional studies include bone scan, gallium imaging, and labeled leukocyte imaging. No single test is equally efficacious in all situations, and thus the procedure(s) performed should be optimized for the individual patient. Three-phase bone imaging, readily available and relatively inexpensive, is very accurate in unviolated bone. In the setting of underlying osseous abnormalities, however, the specificity of the test decreases. Four-phase bone, sequential bone/gallium, and labeled leukocyte imaging all have been used in an effort to enhance specificity. Labeled leukocyte imaging is the radionuclide procedure of choice for diagnosing so-called complicating osteomyelitis such as infected joint prostheses, diabetic pedal osteomyelitis, and infection of the neuropathic joint. To maximize the accuracy of the study, complementary bone marrow imaging often must be performed. Labeled leukocyte imaging is of limited value in spinal osteomyelitis, however, because this entity often presents as a nonspecific photopenic defect on white cell studies. The conventional radionuclide study for evaluating spinal osteomyelitis is gallium imaging, which should be performed regardless of the findings on a contemporaneous bone scan. The reasons for this are as follows: Gallium improves the specificity of the bone scan; gallium detects accompanying soft tissue infection, whereas the bone scan does not, and gallium may be more sensitive than the bone scan in elderly patients.

REFERENCES

• 1 Love C, Palestro C J. Radionuclide imaging of infection.  J Nucl Med Technol. 2004;  32 47-57
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Palestro C J, Torres M A. Radionuclide imaging in orthopedic infections.  Semin Nucl Med. 1997;  27 334-345
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Alazraki N, Dries D, Datz F, Lawrence P, Greenberg E, Taylor Jr A. Value of a 24-hour image (four-phase bone scan) in assessing osteomyelitis in patients with peripheral vascular disease.  J Nucl Med. 1985;  26 711-717
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Israel O, Gips S, Jerushalmi J, Frenkel A, Front D. Osteomyelitis and soft-tissue infection: differential diagnosis with 24 hour/4 hour ratio of Tc-99m MDP uptake.  Radiology. 1987;  163 725-726
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Hoffer P. Gallium: mechanisms.  J Nucl Med. 1980;  21 282-285
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Palestro C J. The current role of gallium imaging in infection.  Semin Nucl Med. 1994;  24 128-141
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Palestro C J, Torres M A. Radionuclide imaging of nonosseous infection.  Q J Nucl Med. 1999;  43 46-60
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Fineman D S, Palestro C J, Kim C K et al.. Detection of abnormalities in febrile AIDS patients with In-111-labeled leukocyte and GA-67 scintigraphy.  Radiology. 1989;  170 677-680
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Love C, Opoku-Agyemang P, Tomas M B, Pugliese P V, Bhargava K K, Palestro C J. Pulmonary activity on labeled leukocyte images: physiologic, pathologic, and imaging correlation.  Radiographics. 2002;  22 1385-1393
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Roddie M E, Peters A M, Danpure H J et al.. Inflammation: imaging with Tc-99m HMPAO-labeled leukocytes.  Radiology. 1988;  166 767-772
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Palestro C J, Love C, Tronco G G, Tomas M B, Rini J N. Combined labeled leukocyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid marrow imaging for diagnosing musculoskeletal infection: principles, technique, interpretation, indications and limitations.  Radiographics. 2006;  26 859-870
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Feigin D S, Strauss H W, James A E. The bone marrow scan in experimental osteomyelitis.  Skeletal Radiol. 1976;  1 103-108
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Mulamba L, Ferrant A, Leners N, Nayer P, Rombouts J J, Vincent A. Indium-111 leucocyte scanning in the evaluation of painful hip arthroplasty.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1983;  54 695-697
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Palestro C J, Kim C K, Swyer A J, Capozzi J D, Solomon R W, Goldsmith S J. Total-hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic indium-111-labeled leukocyte activity and complementary technetium-99m-sulfur colloid imaging in suspected infection.  J Nucl Med. 1990;  31 1950-1955
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 King A D, Peters A M, Stuttle A W, Lavender J P. Imaging of bone infection with labelled white blood cells: role of contemporaneous bone marrow imaging.  Eur J Nucl Med. 1990;  17 148-151
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Palestro C J, Swyer A J, Kim C K, Goldsmith S J. Infected knee prosthesis: diagnosis with In-111 leukocyte, Tc-99m sulfur colloid, and Tc-99m MDP imaging.  Radiology. 1991;  179 645-648
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Seabold J E, Nepola J V, Marsh J L et al.. Postoperative bone marrow alterations: potential pitfalls in the diagnosis of osteomyelitis with In-111-labeled leukocyte scintigraphy.  Radiology. 1991;  180 741-747
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Palestro C J, Roumanas P, Swyer A J, Kim C K, Goldsmith S J. Diagnosis of musculoskeletal infection using combined In-111 labeled leukocyte and Tc-99m SC marrow imaging.  Clin Nucl Med. 1992;  17 269-273
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Achong D M, Oates E. The computer-generated bone marrow subtraction image: a valuable adjunct to combined In-111 WBC/Tc-99m in sulfur colloid scintigraphy for musculoskeletal infection.  Clin Nucl Med. 1994;  19 188-193
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Palestro C J, Mehta H H, Patel M et al.. Marrow versus infection in the Charcot joint: indium-111 leukocyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid scintigraphy.  J Nucl Med. 1998;  39 346-350
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Joseph T N, Mujitaba M, Chen A L et al.. Efficacy of combined technetium-99m sulfur colloid/indium-111 leukocyte scans to detect infected total hip and knee arthroplasties.  J Arthroplasty. 2001;  16 753-758
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Love C, Marwin S E, Tomas M B et al.. Diagnosing infection in the failed joint replacement: A comparison of coincidence detection fluorine-18 FDG and indium-111-labeled leukocyte/technetium-99m-sulfur colloid marrow imaging.  J Nucl Med. 2004;  45 1864-1871
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Pill S G, Parvizi J, Tang P H et al.. Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and (111)indium-white blood cell imaging in the diagnosis of periprosthetic infection of the hip.  J Arthroplasty. 2006;  21(Suppl 2) 91-97
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Palestro C J, Kim C K, Swyer A J, Vallabhajosula S, Goldsmith S J. Radionuclide diagnosis of vertebral osteomyelitis: indium-111-leukocyte and technetium-99m-methylene diphosphonate bone scintigraphy.  J Nucl Med. 1991;  32 1861-1865
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Currier B L, Eismont F J. Infections of the spine. In Herkowitz HN, Garfin SR, Balderston RA, Eismont FJ, Bell GR, Weisel SW The Spine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia; WB Saunders 1992: 1319-1380
  Google Scholar
• 26 Sapico F L, Montgomerie J Z. Pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: report of nine cases and review of the literature.  Rev Infect Dis. 1979;  1 754-776
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Modic M T, Feiglin D H, Piraino D W et al.. Vertebral osteomyelitis: Assessment using MR.  Radiology. 1985;  157 157-166
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Meyers S P, Wiener S N. Diagnosis of hematogenous pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis by magnetic resonance imaging.  Arch Intern Med. 1991;  151 683-687
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Reddy S, Leite C C, Jinkins J R. Imaging of infectious diseases of the spine. In: Lee R Spinal Imaging (State of the Art Reviews: Spine). Philadelphia; Hanley and Belfus 1995 9: 119-139
  Google Scholar
• 30 Palestro C J, Love C, Miller T T. Imaging of musculoskeletal infections.  Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2006;  20 1197-1218
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Gratz S, Dörner J, Oestmann J W et al.. 67Ga-citrate and 99Tcm-MDP for estimating the severity of vertebral osteomyelitis.  Nucl Med Commun. 2000;  21 111-120
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Love C, Patel M, Lonner B S, Tomas M B, Palestro C J. Diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis: a comparison of bone and gallium scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging.  Clin Nucl Med. 2000;  25 963-977
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Deutsch S D, Gandsman E J, Spraragen S C. Quantitative regional blood-flow analysis and its clinical application during routine bone-scanning.  J Bone Joint Surg. 1981;  63(A) 295-305
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Schlaeffer F, Mikolich D J, Mates S M. Technetium Tc 99m diphosphonate bone scan. False-normal findings in elderly patients with hematogenous vertebral osteomyelitis.  Arch Intern Med. 1987;  147 2024-2026
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Bruschwein D A. Brown, McLeod. Gallium scintigraphy in the evaluation of disk-space infections: concise communication.  J Nucl Med. 1980;  21 925-927
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Hadjipavlou A G, Cesani-Vazquez F, Villaneuva-Meyer J, Mader J T, Necessary J T, Crow W, Jensen R E, Chaljub G. The effectiveness of gallium citrate Ga 67 radionuclide imaging in vertebral osteomyelitis revisited.  Am J Orthop. 1998;  27 179-183
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Nolla-Solé J M, Mateo-Soria L, Rozadilla-Sacanell A, Mora-Salvador J, Valverde-García J, Roig-Escofet D. Role of technetium-99m diphosphonate and gallium-67 citrate bone scanning in the early diagnosis of infectious spondylodiscitis. A comparative study.  Ann Rheum Dis. 1992;  51 665-667
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Lisbona R, Derbekyan V, Novales-Diaz J, Veksler A. Gallium-67 scintigraphy in tuberculous and nontuberculous infectious spondylitis.  J Nucl Med. 1993;  34 853-859
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Gemmel F, Dumarey N, Palestro C J. Radionuclide imaging of spinal infections.  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;  33 1226-1237
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Whalen J L, Brown M L, McLeod R, Fitzgerald Jr R H. Limitations of indium leukocyte imaging for the diagnosis of spine infections.  Spine. 1991;  16 193-197
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 41 Newman L G, Waller J, Palestro C J et al.. Unsuspected osteomyelitis in diabetic foot ulcers. Diagnosis and monitoring by leukocyte scanning with indium In111 oxyquinoline.  JAMA. 1991;  266 1246-1251
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Seldin D W, Heiken J, Feldman F, Alderson P O. Effect of soft tissue pathology on detection of pedal osteomyelitis in diabetics.  J Nucl Med. 1985;  26 988-993
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 43 Maurer A H, Millmond S H, Knight L C et al.. Infection in diabetic osteoarthropathy: use of indium-labeled leukocytes for diagnosis.  Radiology. 1986;  161 221-225
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 44 Shults D W, Hunter G C, McIntyre K E, Parent F N, Piotrowski J J, Bernhard V M. Value of radiographs and bone scans in determining the need for therapy in diabetic patients with foot ulcers.  Am J Surg. 1989;  158 525-530
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Palestro C J, Cohen I R, Goldsmith S J. Wound dressing activity mimicking infection on labeled leukocyte imaging.  Clin Nucl Med. 1992;  17 711-713
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Palestro C J, Caprioli R, Love C et al.. Rapid diagnosis of pedal osteomyelitis in diabetics with a technetium-99m labeled monoclonal antigranulocyte antibody.  J Foot Ankle Surg. 2003;  42 2-8
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Palestro C J, Tomas M B. Scintigraphic evaluation of the diabetic foot. In: Freeman LM Nuclear Medicine Annual. 2000 Philadelphia; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2000: 143-172
  Google Scholar
• 48 Seabold J E, Flickinger F W, Kao S C et al.. Indium-111-leukocyte/technetium-99m-MDP bone and magnetic resonance imaging: difficulty of diagnosing osteomyelitis in patients with neuropathic osteoarthropathy.  J Nucl Med. 1990;  31 549-556
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 49 Gandsman E J, Deutsch S D, Kahn C B, McCullough R W. Differentiation of Charcot joint from osteomyelitis through dynamic bone imaging.  Nucl Med Commun. 1990;  11 45-53
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 50 Rosenberg A E. Bones, joints, and soft tissue tumors. In: Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N Robbins and Cotran Pathologic Basis of Disease. 7th ed. Philadelphia; Elsevier WB Saunders 2005: 1273-1324
  Google Scholar
• 51 Hayashida K, Ochi T, Fujimoto M et al.. Bone marrow changes in adjuvant-induced and collagen-induced arthritis. Interleukin-1 and interleukin-6 activity and abnormal myelopoiesis.  Arthritis Rheum. 1992;  35 241-245
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 52 Newman L G, Waller J, Palestro C J et al.. Leukocyte scanning with ¹¹¹In is superior to magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of clinically unsuspected osteomyelitis in diabetic foot ulcers.  Diabetes Care. 1992;  15 1527-1530
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 53 Love C, Tomas M B, Marwin S E, Pugliese P V, Palestro C J. Role of nuclear medicine in diagnosis of the infected joint replacement.  Radiographics. 2001;  21 1229-1238
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 54 Bauer T W, Schils J. The pathology of total joint arthroplasty. II. Mechanisms of implant failure.  Skeletal Radiol. 1999;  28 483-497
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 55 Maloney W J, Smith R L. Periprosthetic osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty: the role of particulate wear debris.  Instr Course Lect. 1996;  45 171-182
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 56 Wooley P H, Nasser S, Fitzgerald Jr R H. The immune response to implant materials in humans.  Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;  326 63-70
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 57 Toumbis C A, Kronick J L, Wooley P H, Nasser S. Total joint arthroplasty and the immune response.  Semin Arthritis & Rheum. 1997;  27 44-47
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 58 Hanssen A D, Rand J A. Evaluation and treatment of infection at the site of a total hip or knee arthroplasty.  Instr Course Lect. 1999;  48 111-122
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 59 Della Valle C J, Bogner E, Desai P et al.. Analysis of frozen sections of intraoperative specimens obtained at the time of reoperation after hip or knee resection arthroplasty for the treatment of infection.  J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;  81 684-689
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 60 Tsukayama D T, Estrada R, Gustilo R B. Infection after total hip arthroplasty. A study of the treatment of one hundred and six infections.  J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;  78 512-523
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 61 Williamson B RJ, McLaughlin R E, Wang G J, Miller C W, Teates C D, Bray S T. Radionuclide bone imaging as a means of differentiating loosening and infection in patients with a painful total hip prosthesis.  Radiology. 1979;  133 723-726
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 62 McInerney D P, Hyde I D. Technetium⁹⁹Tc^m pyrophosphate scanning in the assessment of the painful hip prosthesis.  Clin Radiol. 1978;  29 513-517
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 63 Williams F, McCall I W, Park W M, O'Connor B T, Morris V. Gallium-67 scanning in the painful total hip replacement.  Clin Radiol. 1981;  32 431-439
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 64 Mountford P J, Hall F M, Wells C P, Coakley A J. ⁹⁹Tcm-MDP, ⁶⁷Ga-citrate and ¹¹¹In-leucocytes for detecting prosthetic hip infection.  Nucl Med Commun. 1986;  7 113-120
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 65 Aliabadi P, Tumeh S S, Weissman B N, McNeil B J. Cemented total hip prosthesis: radiographic and scintigraphic evaluation.  Radiology. 1989;  173 203-206
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 66 Utz J A, Lull R J, Galvin E G. Asymptomatic total hip prosthesis: natural history determined using Tc-99m MDP bone scans.  Radiology. 1986;  161 509-512
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 67 Oswald S G, Van Nostrand D, Savory C G, Callaghan J J. Three-phase bone scan and indium white blood cell scintigraphy following porous coated hip arthroplasty: a prospective study of the prosthetic tip.  J Nucl Med. 1989;  30 1321-1331
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 68 Oswald S G, Van Nostrand D, Savory C G, Anderson J H, Callaghan J J. The acetabulum: a prospective study of three-phase bone and indium white blood cell scintigraphy following porous-coated hip arthroplasty.  J Nucl Med. 1990;  31 274-280
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 69 Ashbrooke A B, Calvert P T. Bone scan appearances after uncemented hip replacement.  J R Soc Med. 1990;  83 768-769
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 70 Rosenthall L, Lepanto L, Raymond F. Radiophosphate uptake in asymptomatic knee arthroplasty.  J Nucl Med. 1987;  28 1546-1549
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 71 Hofmann A A, Wyatt R WB, Daniels A U, Armstrong L, Alazraki N, Taylor Jr A. Bone scans after total knee arthroplasty in asymptomatic patients.  Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;  251 183-188
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 72 Reing C M, Richin P F, Kenmore P I. Differential bone-scanning in the evaluation of a painful total joint replacement.  J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979;  61 933-936
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 73 Rushton N, Coakley A J, Tudor J, Wraight E P. The value of technetium and gallium scanning in assessing pain after total hip replacement.  J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1982;  64 313-318
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 74 McKillop J H, McKay I, Cuthbert G F, Fogelman I, Gray H W, Sturrock R. Scintigraphic evaluation of the painful prosthetic joint: a comparison of gallium-67 citrate and indium-111 labelled leukocyte imaging.  Clin Radiol. 1984;  35 239-241
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 75 Tehranzadeh J, Gubernick I, Blaha D. Prospective study of sequential technetium-99m phosphate and gallium imaging in painful hip prostheses (comparison of diagnostic modalities).  Clin Nucl Med. 1988;  13 229-236
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 76 Kraemer W J, Saplys R, Waddell J P, Morton J. Bone scan, gallium scan, and hip aspiration in the diagnosis of infected total hip arthroplasty.  J Arthroplasty. 1993;  8 611-615
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 77 Merkel K D, Fitzgerald Jr R H, Brown M L. Scintigraphic examination of total hip arthroplasty: comparison of indium with technetium-gallium in the loose and infected canine arthroplasty. In: Welch RB The Hip. Proceedings of the Twelfth Open Scientific Meeting of the Hip Society, Atlanta, GA 1984: 163-192
  Google Scholar
• 78 Merkel K D, Brown M L, Fitzgerald Jr R H. Sequential technetium-99m HMDP-gallium-67 citrate imaging for the evaluation of infection in the painful prosthesis.  J Nucl Med. 1986;  27 1413-1417
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 79 Love C, Tronco G G, Yu A K, Nichols K J, Marwin S E, Palestro  CJ. Diagnosing the infected prosthetic hip: an intraindividual comparison of three-phase bone, bone, gallium, bone/gallium, leukocyte, leukocyte/bone, and leukocyte/marrow imaging.  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;  34(suppl 2) (P)S384
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 80 Pring D J, Henderson R G, Keshavarzian A et al.. Indium-granulocyte scanning in the painful prosthetic joint.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986;  147 167-172
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 81 Pring D J, Henderson R G, Rivett A G, Krausz T, Coombs R R, Lavender J P. Autologous granulocyte scanning of painful prosthetic joints.  J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;  68 647-652
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 82 Rand J A, Brown M L. The value of indium 111 leukocyte scanning in the evaluation of painful or infected total knee arthroplasties.  Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;  259 179-182
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 83 Wukich D K, Abreu S H, Callaghan J J et al.. Diagnosis of infection by preoperative scintigraphy with indium-labeled white blood cells.  J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;  69 1353-1360
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 84 Johnson J A, Christie M J, Sandler M P, Parks P F, Homra L, Kaye J J. Detection of occult infection following total joint arthroplasty using sequential technetium-99m HDP bone scintigraphy and indium-111 WBC imaging.  J Nucl Med. 1988;  29 1347-1353
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 85 Love C, Tronco G G, Yu A K et al.. Diagnosing lower extremity prosthetic joint infection: intraindividual comparison of leukocyte/marrow and leukocyte/bone imaging.  J Nucl Med. 2007;  48(suppl) 62
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 86 Palestro C J, Kim C K, Vega A, Goldsmith S J. Acute effects of radiation therapy on indium-111-labeled leukocyte uptake in bone marrow.  J Nucl Med. 1989;  30 1889-1891
  PubMedGoogle Scholar

Christopher J PalestroM.D. 

Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Long Island Jewish Medical Center

270-05 76th Ave., New Hyde Park, NY 11040

Email: palestro@lij.edu