Aim: The purpose of this study was to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of published data regarding the diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) in prosthetic infection after arthroplasty.
Methods: A comprehensive computer literature search of studies published through May 31, 2012 regarding PET or PET/CT in patients suspicious of prosthetic infection was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus databases. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of PET or PET/CT in patients suspicious of prosthetic infection on a per prosthesis-based analysis were calculated. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated to measure the accuracy of PET or PET/CT in patients with suspicious of prosthetic infection.
Results: Fourteen studies comprising 838 prosthesis with suspicious of prosthetic infection after arthroplasty were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity of PET or PET/CT in detecting prosthetic infection was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82-90%) on a per prosthesis-based analysis. The pooled specificity of PET or PET/CT in detecting prosthetic infection was 86% (95% CI 83-89%) on a per prosthesis-based analysis. The area under the ROC curve was 0.93 on a per prosthesis-based analysis.
Conclusion: In patients suspicious of prosthetic infection, FDG PET or PET/CT demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity. FDG PET or PET/CT are accurate methods in this setting. Nevertheless, possible sources of false positive results and influcing factors should kept in mind.