Nuclear Medicine In Prosthesis Infections

Abstract

Differentiating aseptic loosening from infection in patients with prosthesis is important becausetheir treatments are very different. Differentiating these two entities have some difficulties.Increased peripheral blood leukocytes, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive proteinlevels are neither sensitive nor specific for infection. Although joint aspiration with Gram stainand culture has a specificity of 90% or more, its sensitivity ranges from 28% to 92%. Computedtomography and magnetic resonance imaging modalities are limited by hardware-inducedartifacts. Radionuclide imaging is not affected by orthopedic hardware and is the current imagingmodality of choice for suspected joint replacement infection. Bone scintigraphy is sensitive foridentifying the failed joint replacement, however, can not be used to determine the definitediagnose. Thus, bone scintigraphy is used as a screening test or combined with other radionuclidestudies. Combined bone and gallium imaging mildly improve the diagnose over bonescintigraphy alone. Presently, combined leukocyte/marrow imaging, with approximately 90%accuracy, is the radionuclide imaging procedure of choice for diagnosing prosthetic jointinfection. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography has been investigated. Itsvalue in the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection is debatable

Keywords

• Joint Prosthesis, Infection, Nuclear Medicine

Protez Enfeksiyonlarında Nükleer Tıp Yöntemleri

Abstract

Protezi bulunan hastalarda aseptik gevşeme ile enfeksiyonu ayırt etmek önemlidir çünkütedavileri çok farklıdır. Bu iki antiteyi birbirinden ayırmanın bazı güçlükleri vardır. Periferikkanda artmış lökosit, eritrosit sedimantasyon hızı ve C reaktif protein seviyeleri enfeksiyon içinne sensitif ne de spesifiktir. Eklem aspirasyonu ile yapılan gram boyama ve kültür %90’ınüzerinde spesifiteye sahip olsa da sensitivitesi %28-%92 arasında seyreder. Bilgisayarlıtomografi ve manyetik rezonans görüntüleme yöntemlerinin kullanımı ise metalik artefaktsebebiyle sınırlıdır. Radyonüklid görüntüleme yöntemleri ise ortopedik metalik artefaktlardanetkilenmezler ve şüpheli eklem protezi enfeksiyonu olgularında günümüzde kullanılırlar. Kemiksintigrafisi problemli eklem protezini tespit etmede sensitif bir yöntemdir fakat kesin tanıyıkoymada başarısızdır. Bu yüzden kemik sintigrafisi tarama testi olarak veya diğer radyonüklidçalışmalarla kombine kullanılır. Kombine galyum/kemik sintigrafisi tek başına kemiksintigrafisine göre hafif düzeyde tanıya olumlu katkı yapmıştır. Günümüzde yaklaşık %90doğruluğa sahip olan işaretli beyaz küre/kemik iliği sintigrafisinin kombine kullanımı eklemprotezi enfeksiyonu tanısında tercih edilen radyonüklid görüntüleme yöntemidir. 18Fflorodeoksiglukoz pozitron emisyon tomografisi üzerinde araştırmalar devam etmektedir, eklemprotezi enfeksiyonlarındaki yeri henüz tartışmalıdır

Keywords

• Eklem Protezi,Enfeksiyon,Nükleer Tıp

References

1. Lentino JR. Prosthetic joint infections: bane of orthopedists, challenge for infectious disease specialists. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36:1157–61.
2. Zimmerli W, Lew PD, Waldvogel FA. Pathogenesis of foreign body infection: evidence for a local granulocyte defect. J Clin Invest. 1984;73:1191–00.
3. Murdoch DR, Roberts SA, Fowler VG Jr, et al. Infection of orthopedic prostheses after Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:647–9.
4. Johnson JA, Christie MJ, Sandler MP, Parks PF Jr, Homra L, Kaye JJ. Detection of occult infection following total joint arthroplasty using sequentiel technetium-99m HDP bone scintigraphy and indium–111 WBC imaging. J Nucl Med. 1988;29:1347–53.
5. Barrack RL, Haris WH. The value of aspiration of the hip joint before revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:66–76.
6. Fehring TK, Cohen B. Aspiration as guide to sepsis in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:543–7.
7. Spangehl MJ, Masri BA, O’Connel JX, Duncan CP. Prospective analysis of preoperative and intraoperative investigations fort he diagnosis of infection aktivite tutulumu the sites of two hundred and two revision total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:672–83.
8. Gelman MI, Coleman RE, Stevens PM, et al. Radiography, radionuclide imaging, and arthrography in the evaluation of total hip and knee replacement. Radiology. 1978;128:677–82.

9. Weiss PE, Mall JC, Hoffer PB, et al. 99mTc- methylenediphosphonate bone imaging in the evaluation of total hip prostheses. Radiology. 1979;133:727–9.
10. Mountford PJ, Hall FM, Wells CP, et al. 99Tcm-MDP, 67Ga- citrate and 111In-leucocytes for detecting prosthetic hip infection. Nucl Med Commun. 1986;7:113–20.
11. Aliabadi P, Tumeh SS, Weissman BN, et al. Cemented total hip prosthesis: Radiographic and scintigraphic evaluation. Radiology. 1989;173:203–6.
12. Utz JA, Lull RJ, Galvin EG. Asymptomatic total hip prosthesis: Natural history determined using Tc-99m MDP bone scans. Radiology. 1986;161:509–12.
13. Oswald SG, Van Nostrand D, Savory CG, et al. Three-phase bone scan and indium white blood cell scintigraphy following porous coated hip arthroplasty: A prospective study of the prosthetic tip. J Nucl Med. 1989;30:1321–31.
14. Oswald SG, Van Nostrand D, Savory CG, et al. The acetabulum: a prospective study of three-phase bone and indium white blood cell scintigraphy following porous-coated hip arthroplasty. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:274–80.
15. Ashbrooke AB, Calvert PT. Bone scan appearances after uncemented hip replacement. J Royal Soc Med. 1993;83:768– 9.
16. Rosenthall L, Lepanto L, Raymond F. Radiophosphate uptake in asymptomatic knee arthroplasty. J Nucl Med. 1987;28:1546–9.
17. Hofmann AA, Wyatt RWB, Daniels AU, et al. Bone scans after total knee arthroplasty in asymptomatic patients. Clin Orthop. 1990;251:183–8.
18. Palestro CJ, Swyer AJ, Kim CK, et al. Infected knee prostheses: Diagnosis with In–111 leukocyte, Tc-99m sulfur colloid, and Tc-99m MDP imaging Radiology. 1991;179:645– 8.
19. Love C, Tronco GG, Yu AK, et al. Diagnosing lower extremity (LE) prosthetic joint infection: Bone, gallium & labeled leukocyte imaging. Presented at the 2008 SNM Meeting, New Orleans, LA, 2008:June 14–8.
20. Magnuson JE, Brown ML, Hauser MF, et al. In–111 labeled leukocyte scintigraphy in suspected orthopedic prosthesis infection: Comparison with other imaging modalities. Radiology. 1988;168:235–9.
21. Levitsky KA, Hozack WJ, Balderston RA, et al. Evaluation of the painful prosthetic joint. Relative value of bone scan, sedimentation rate, and joint aspiration. J Arthroplasty. 1991;6:237–44.
22. Reing CM, Richin PF, Kenmore PI. Differential bone- scanning in the evaluation of a painful total joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979;61-A:933–6.
23. Rushton N, Coakley AJ, Tudor J, et al. The value of technetium and gallium scanning in assessing pain after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1982;64-B:313–8.
24. McKillop JH, McKay I, Cuthbert GF, et al. Scintigraphic evaluation of the painful prosthetic joint: A comparison of gallium–67 citrate and indium–111 labelled leukocyte imaging. Clin Radiol. 1984;35:239–41.
25. Palestro CJ. The current role of gallium imaging in infection. Semin Nucl Med. 1994;24:128–41.
26. Williams F, McCall IW, Park WM, et al. Gallium–67 scanning in the painful total hip replacement. Clin Radiol. 1981;32:431– 9.
27. Merkel KD, Fitzgerald RH Jr, Brown ML. Scintigraphic examination of total hip arthroplasty: comparison of indium with technetium-gallium in the loose and infected canine arthroplasty, in Welch RB (ed): The Hip. Proceedings of the Twelfth Open Scientific Meeting of the Hip Society, Atlanta, GA, 1984:163–92.
28. Merkel KD, Brown ML, Fitzgerald RH Jr. Sequential technetium-99m HMDP-gallium–67 citrate imaging for the evaluation of infection in the painful prosthesis. J Nucl Med. 1986;27:1413–7.
29. Gomez-Luzuriaga MA, Galan V, Villar JM. Scintigraphy with Tc, Ga and In in painful total hip prostheses Int Orthop. 1988;12:163–7.
30. Kraemer WJ, Saplys R, Waddell JP, et al. Bone scan, gallium scan, and hip aspiration in the diagnosis of infected total hip arthroplasty J Arthroplasty. 1993;8:611–5.
31. Propst Proctor SL, Dillingham MF, McDougall IR, et al. The white blood cell scan in orthopedics. Clin Orthop. 1982;168:157–65.
32. Pring DJ, Henderson RG, Keshavarzian, A et al. Indium- granulocyte scanning in the painful prosthetic joint. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986;146:167–72.
33. Wukich DK, Abreu SH, Callaghan JJ, et al. Diagnosis of infection by preoperative scintigraphy with indium-labeled white blood cells. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69-A:1353–60.
34. Johnson JA, Christie MJ, Sandler MP, et al. Detection of occult infection following total joint arthroplasty using sequential technetium-99m HDP bone scintigraphy and indium–111 WBC imaging. J Nucl Med. 1988;29:1347–53.
35. Palestro CJ, Kim CK, Swyer AJ, et al. Total hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic indium–111-labeled leukocyte activity and complementary technetium-99m-sulfur colloid imaging in suspected infection. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:1950–5.
36. Fineman D, Palestro CJ, Kim CK, et al. Detection of abnormalities in febrile AIDS patients with In-111-labeled leukocyte and GA-67 scintigraphy. Radiology. 1989;170:677– 80.
37. Palestro CJ, Torres MA. Radionuclide imaging in orthopedic infections. Semin Nucl Med. 1997;27:334–45.
38. Palestro CJ, Mehta HH, Patel M, et al. Marrow versus infection in the Charcot joint: Indium–111 leukocyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid scintigraphy. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:346–50.
39. Torres MA, Palestro CJ. Leukocyte-marrow scintigraphy in hyperostosis frontalis interna. J Nucl Med. 1997;38:1283–5.
40. Love C, Marwin SE, Palestro CJ. Nuclear medicine and the infected joint replacement. Semin Nucl Med. 2009;39:66–78.
41. Palestro CJ, Love C, Tronco GG, et al. Combined labeled leukocyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid marrow imaging for diagnosing musculoskeletal infection: principles, technique, interpretation, indications and limitations. RadioGraphics. 2006;26:859–70.
42. Mulamba L’AH, Ferrant A, Leners N, et al. Indium–111 leucocyte scanning in the evaluation of painful hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand. 1983;54:695–7.
43. Love C, Marwin SE, Tomas MB, et al. Diagnosing infection in the failed joint replacement: a comparison of coincidence detection fluorine–18 FDG and indium–111-labeled leukocyte/technetium-99m-sulfur colloid marrow imaging. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1864–71.
44. Pill SG, Parvizi J, Tang PH, et al. Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and (111)indium-white blood cell imaging in the diagnosis of periprosthetic infection of the hip. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21:91– 7.
45. Joseph TN, Mujitaba M, Chen AL, et al. Efficacy of combined technetium-99m sulfur colloid/indium–111 leukocyte scans to detect infected total hip and knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:753–8.
46. Pelosi E, Baiocco C, Pennone M, et al. 99mTc-HMPAO- leukocyte scintigraphy in patients with symptomatic total hip or knee arthroplasty: improved diagnostic accuracy by means of semiquantitative evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:438–44.
47. Zhuang H, Duarte PS, Pourdehnad M, et al. The promising role of 18F-FDG PET in detecting infected lower limb prosthesis implants. J Nuc Med. 2001;42:44–8.
48. Chacko TK, Zhuang H, Stevenson K, et al. The importance of the location of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in periprosthetic infection in painful hip prostheses. Nucl Med Commun. 2002;23:851–5.
49. Reinartz P, Mumme T, Hermanns B, et al. Radionuclide imaging of the painful hip arthroplasty. Positron-emission tomography versus triplephase bone scanning. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87-B: 465–70.
50. Manthey N, Reinhard P, Moog F, et al. The use of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to differentiate between synovitis, loosening and infection of hip and knee prostheses. Nucl Med Commun. 2002;23:645–53.
51. Stumpe KD, Notzli HP, Zanetti M, et al. FDG PET for differentiation of infection and aseptic loosening in total hip replacements: Comparison with conventional radiography and three-phase bone scintigraphy. Radiology. 2004;231:333–41.
52. Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1412–7.
53. Machens HG, Pallua N, Becker M, et al. Technetium-99m human immunoglobulin (HIG): a new substance for scintigraphic detection of bone and joint infections. Microsurgery. 1996;17:272–7.
54. Oyen WJ, Claessens RA, van Horn JR, van der Meer JW, Corstens FH. Scintigraphic detection of bone and joint infections with indium–111- labeled nonspecific polyclonal human immunoglobulin G. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:403–12.
55. Oyen WJ, van Horn JR, Claessens RA, Slooff TJ, van der Meer JW, Corstens FH. Diagnosis of bone, joint, and joint prosthesis infections with In–111-labeled nonspecific human immunoglobulin G scintigraphy. Radiology. 1992;182:195–9.
56. Demirkol MO, Adalet I, Unal SN, Tozun R, Cantez S. 99Tcm- polyclonal IgG scintigraphy in the detection of infected hip and knee prostheses. Nucl Med Commun. 1997;18:543–8.
57. De Lima Ramos PA, Martin-Comin J, Bajen MT, et al. Simultaneous administration of 99Tcm-HMPAO-labelled autologous leukocytes and 111In-labelled non-specific polyclonal human immunoglobulin G in bone and joint infections. Nucl Med Commun. 1996;17:749–57.
58. Nijhof MW, Oyen WJ, van Kampen A, Claessens RA, van der Meer JW, Corstens FH. Hip and knee arthroplasty infection. In–111-IgG scintigraphy in 102 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 1997;68:2–6.
59. Palermo F, Boccaletto F, Paolin A, Carniato A, Zoli P, Giusto F, Tura S. Comparison of Technetium-99m-MDP, Technetium- 99m-WBC and Technetium-99m-HIG in Musculoskeletal Inflammation. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:516–21.
60. Locher JT, Seybold K, Andres RY, Schubiger PA, Mach JP, Buchegger F. Imaging of inflammatory and infectious lesions after injection of radioiodinated monoclonal anti-granulocytes antibodies. Nucl Med Commun. 1986;7:659–70.
61. Skehan SJ,White JF, Evans JW, et al. Mechanisim of accumulation of 99mTc-sulesomab in inflammation. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:11–8.
62. Emilios E. Pakos, Thomas A. Trikalinos, Andreas D. Fotopoulos, John P. A. Ioannidis. Diagnosis after Total Joint Arthroplasty with Antigranulocyte Scintigraphy with 99mTc- labeled Monoclonal Antibodies: A Meta-Analysis. Radiology. 2007;242: 101–8.
63. Devillers A, Garin E, Polard JL, et al. Comparison of Tc-99m- labelled antileukocyte fragment Fab0 and Tc-99m-HMPAO leukocyte scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone and joint infections: a prospective study. Nucl Med Commun. 2000;21:747–53.
64. Vorne M, Karhunen K, Lantto T, et al. Comparison of 123I monoclonal granulocyte antibody and 99Tcm-HMPAO- labelled leucocytes in the detection of inflammation. Nucl Med Commun. 1988;9:623–9.