Heiba Sherif I, Stempler Lewen, Sullivan Timothy, Kolker Dov, Kostakoglu Lale
aDepartment of Radiology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Nuclear Medicine Division bDepartment of Medicine, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Infectious Diseases Division cDepartment of Orthopedics, Mount Sinai Medical Center dIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.
Nucl Med Commun. 2017 Feb;38(2):129-134. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000625.
The successful management of infected pelvic pressure ulcer patients (PPUP) depends on the distinction between infections limited to soft tissue (STI) and those with underlying osteomyelitis (OM), which can be difficult to determine clinically. Dual-isotope (DI) comprehensive imaging has excellent accuracy in localizing diabetic foot infection and differentiating OM from STI with SPECT/CT utilization. In this study, we assess the accuracy and confidence of the different DI SPECT/CT imaging steps in PPUP with confirmed diagnoses.
Pelvic flow and blood pool imaging were followed by labeled white blood cell reinjection and Tc-99m hydroxymethylene-diphosphonate bone (bone scan) and In-111-leukocytes (white blood cell scan) DI planar and SPECT/CT (step 1) acquisitions. Tc-99m sulfur colloid (bone marrow scan)/WBCS SPECT/CT (step 2) images were obtained on the following day. DI step 1 planar, step 1 SPECT/CT, step 2 SPECT/CT, and combined step 1/step 2 SPECT/CT were reviewed separately for diagnosis and diagnosis confidence. The final diagnosis was confirmed by culture/pathology in 21 patients and clinical/imaging follow-up in 12 patients.
There were 19 OM patients, three STI patients, and 11 patients with no infection. The final diagnosis agreement to DI combined step 1/step 2 SPECT/CT was higher than DI step 2 or step 1 SPECT/CT alone, or DI step 1 planar, as assessed by λ and error reduction %, respectively. Combined DI step 1/step 2 SPECT/CT was more sensitive than DI step 2 SPECT/CT and more specific than DI step 1 SPECT/CT, and showed higher diagnostic confidence than both imaging techniques.
DI SPECT/CT is highly useful in evaluating PPUP with suspected infection. DI step 1 is more sensitive, whereas step 2 is more specific. Both step 1 and step 2 DI SPECT/CT images are needed to accurately and confidently assess for infection and distinguish OM from STI, which are crucial for optimal management.
感染性盆腔压疮患者(PPUP)的成功管理取决于区分局限于软组织的感染(STI)和伴有潜在骨髓炎(OM)的感染,而这在临床上可能难以确定。双同位素(DI)综合成像在定位糖尿病足感染以及利用SPECT/CT区分OM和STI方面具有出色的准确性。在本研究中,我们评估了已确诊的PPUP患者中不同DI SPECT/CT成像步骤的准确性和可信度。
先进行盆腔血流和血池成像,随后进行标记白细胞再注射以及Tc-99m亚甲基二膦酸盐骨显像(骨扫描)和In-111白细胞显像(白细胞扫描)的DI平面和SPECT/CT(步骤1)采集。次日获取Tc-99m硫胶体(骨髓扫描)/白细胞显像SPECT/CT(步骤2)图像。分别对DI步骤1平面图像、步骤1 SPECT/CT、步骤2 SPECT/CT以及联合步骤1/步骤2 SPECT/CT进行诊断及诊断可信度评估。21例患者通过培养/病理确诊,12例患者通过临床/影像学随访确诊。
有19例OM患者、3例STI患者以及11例无感染患者。分别通过λ和误差减少百分比评估,DI联合步骤1/步骤2 SPECT/CT的最终诊断一致性高于单独的DI步骤2或步骤1 SPECT/CT,以及DI步骤1平面图像。联合DI步骤1/步骤2 SPECT/CT比DI步骤2 SPECT/CT更敏感,比DI步骤1 SPECT/CT更具特异性,并且显示出比两种成像技术更高的诊断可信度。
DI SPECT/CT在评估疑似感染的PPUP方面非常有用。DI步骤1更敏感,而步骤2更具特异性。需要DI步骤1和步骤2的SPECT/CT图像来准确且有信心地评估感染情况,并区分OM和STI,这对于优化管理至关重要。