Kumar Rajender, Kumar Rakesh, Kumar Vijay, Malhotra Rajesh
Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET, All INDIA Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110029, India.
Department of Orthopedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
J Orthop Sci. 2016 Mar;21(2):205-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2015.12.018. Epub 2016 Feb 2.
BACKGROUND: The preoperative differentiation of aseptic and septic loosening of hip prostheses remains a diagnostic challenge for clinicians and many molecular imaging techniques have been evaluated. The objective of current study was to establish the clinical utility of dual phase 18F-fluoride PET/CT (DPFP) in diagnosing implant loosening, differentiation between septic and aseptic loosening and to compare the diagnostic accuracy of DPFP and three-phase bone scan (TPBS). METHODS: In this prospective study, we evaluated 57 hip components in 45 patients (bilateral prostheses in 12 patients, 45 painful and 12 asymptomatic contralateral hip components) with dual phase fluoride PET/CT and TPBS. Findings of skeletal scintigraphy and PET/CT were evaluated by two expert nuclear medicine physicians, blinded with clinical findings and final diagnosis. The patterns of tracer uptake and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) were noted for each joint. The final diagnosis was based on intraoperative findings, histopathological or microbiological examinations. RESULTS: Out of twelve non-painful hips, DPFP correctly identified no loosening in 11 hips while TPBS detected in 10 hips. In the remaining 45 hips with radiological proven loosening to rule out sepsis, DPFP had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of 75%, 97%, 92%, 88% and 88% respectively while TPBS revealed 81%, 86%, 76%, 89% and 82% respectively. DPFP had shown a higher specificity and PPV as compared to the TPBS in the evaluation of painful hip prostheses. The pattern of tracer uptake may help in the differentiation between the two entities. We also noted a significant difference between SUVmax values of septic and aseptic loosening. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggested that DPFP has considerable potential in differentiating septic from aseptic loosening of hip prostheses and more specific to rule out sepsis than TPBS. It may be employed before revision arthroplasty to evaluate implant for loosening and sepsis in loosened implant.
背景:髋假体无菌性和感染性松动的术前鉴别诊断对临床医生来说仍然是一项挑战,许多分子成像技术已被评估。本研究的目的是确立双期18F-氟化物PET/CT(DPFP)在诊断假体松动、鉴别感染性和无菌性松动方面的临床应用价值,并比较DPFP和三相骨扫描(TPBS)的诊断准确性。 方法:在这项前瞻性研究中,我们用双期氟化物PET/CT和TPBS对45例患者的57个髋假体组件进行了评估(12例患者为双侧假体,45个疼痛侧髋假体组件和12个无症状对侧髋假体组件)。两名核医学专家在不知临床结果和最终诊断的情况下,对骨闪烁显像和PET/CT的结果进行了评估。记录每个关节的示踪剂摄取模式和最大标准化摄取值(SUVmax)。最终诊断基于术中发现、组织病理学或微生物学检查。 结果:在12个无疼痛的髋关节中,DPFP正确识别出11个髋关节无松动,而TPBS检测出10个髋关节无松动。在其余45个经影像学证实有松动以排除感染的髋关节中,DPFP的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和准确性分别为75%、97%、92%、88%和88%,而TPBS分别为81%、86%、76%、89%和82%。在评估疼痛性髋假体时,DPFP与TPBS相比显示出更高的特异性和阳性预测值。示踪剂摄取模式可能有助于区分这两种情况。我们还注意到感染性和无菌性松动的SUVmax值之间存在显著差异。 结论:结果表明,DPFP在区分髋假体感染性和无菌性松动方面具有相当大的潜力,并且在排除感染方面比TPBS更具特异性。它可在翻修关节成形术前用于评估假体是否松动以及松动假体是否存在感染。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2005-6
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2004
Nucl Med Commun. 2015-9
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025-3-1
J Orthop Case Rep. 2021-11
Acta Biomed. 2017-6-7