FDG-PET imaging can diagnose periprosthetic infection of the hip

被引:75
作者
Chryssikos, Timothy [2 ]
Parvizi, Javad [1 ]
Ghanem, Elie [1 ]
Newberg, Andrew [2 ]
Zhuang, Hongming [2 ]
Alavi, Abass [2 ]
机构
[1] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Rothman Inst Orthoped, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Dept Nucl Med, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s11999-008-0237-0
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
A battery of diagnostic tests is often required to differentiate aseptic loosening from periprosthetic infection since the gold standard remains elusive. We designed a prospective study to determine the accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging in diagnosing periprosthetic infection in a large multicenter setting. One hundred and thirteen patients with 127 painful hip prostheses were evaluated by FDG-PET. Images were considered positive for infection if PET demonstrated increased FDG activity at the bone-prosthesis interface of the femoral component. A combination of preoperative tests, intraoperative findings, histopathology, and clinical followup constituted the gold standard for diagnosing infection. Among the 35 positive PET scans, 28 hips were confirmed infected according to our criteria for diagnosing periprosthetic infection. Of the 92 hip prostheses with negative FDG-PET findings, 87 were considered aseptic. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for FDG-PET were 0.85 (28 of 33), 0.93 (87 of 94), 0.80 (28 of 35), and 0.95 (87 of 92), respectively. The overall accuracy of this novel noninvasive imaging modality reached 0.91 (115 of 127). Based on our results, FDG-PET appears a promising and accurate diagnostic tool for distinguishing septic from aseptic painful hip prostheses. Level of Evidence: Level II, diagnostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
引用
收藏
页码:1338 / 1342
页数:5
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] Barrack RL, 1997, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P8
  • [2] Diagnosis of periprosthetic infection
    Bauer, TW
    Parvizi, J
    Kobayashi, N
    Krebs, V
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2006, 88A (04) : 869 - 882
  • [3] THE INFECTED HIP AFTER TOTAL HIP-ARTHROPLASTY
    CANNER, GC
    STEINBERG, ME
    HEPPENSTALL, RB
    BALDERSTON, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1984, 66A (09) : 1393 - 1399
  • [4] Reasons for revision hip surgery - A retrospective review
    Clohisy, JC
    Calvert, G
    Tull, F
    McDonald, D
    Maloney, WJ
    [J]. CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2004, (429) : 188 - 192
  • [5] Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography: A highly accurate imaging modality for the diagnosis of chronic musculoskeletal infections
    De Winter, F
    Van de Wiele, C
    Vogelaers, D
    De Smet, K
    Verdonk, R
    Dierckx, RA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2001, 83A (05) : 651 - 660
  • [6] The role of intraoperative frozen sections in revision total joint arthroplasty
    Feldman, DS
    Lonnner, JH
    Desai, P
    Zuckerman, JD
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1995, 77A (12) : 1807 - 1813
  • [7] Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030
    Kurtz, Steven
    Ong, Kevin
    Lau, Edmund
    Mowat, Fionna
    Halpern, Michael
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2007, 89A (04) : 780 - 785
  • [8] Value of leukocyte scintigraphy in suspected implant infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis
    Lazovic, D
    Carls, J
    Floel, A
    Gratz, KF
    [J]. CHIRURG, 1997, 68 (11): : 1181 - 1186
  • [9] Levitsky KA, 1991, J ARTHROPLASTY, V63, P237
  • [10] Love C, 2004, J NUCL MED, V45, P1864