These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Diagnosing infection in the failed joint replacement: a comparison of coincidence detection 18F-FDG and 111In-labeled leukocyte/99mTc-sulfur colloid marrow imaging.
    Author: Love C, Marwin SE, Tomas MB, Krauss ES, Tronco GG, Bhargava KK, Nichols KJ, Palestro CJ.
    Journal: J Nucl Med; 2004 Nov; 45(11):1864-71. PubMed ID: 15534056.
    Abstract:
    UNLABELLED: The objectives of this study were to investigate (18)F-FDG imaging, using a coincidence detection system, for diagnosing prosthetic joint infection and to compare it with combined (111)In-labeled leukocyte/(99m)Tc-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 (18)F-FDG, labeled leukocyte, and bone marrow imaging, and had histopathologic and microbiologic confirmation of the final diagnosis, formed the basis of this investigation. (18)F-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 (18)F-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 (18)F-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 (18)F-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 (18)F-FDG imaging is less accurate than, and cannot replace, labeled leukocyte/marrow imaging for diagnosing infection of the failed prosthetic joint.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]