FDG PET/CT imaging in the diagnosis of osteomyelitisin the diabetic foot

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 39, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 1545-1550

  Kagna, Olga ^a   Srour, Saher ^a   Melamed, Eyal ^a   Militianu, Daniela ^a   Keidar, Zohar ^a  

^a Rambam Health Care Campus ^*  (Israel)

Author keywords

Diabetic foot; FDG; Osteomyelitis; PET CT

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; INSULIN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIABETIC FOOT; DIABETIC OSTEOPATHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DRUG UPTAKE; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; INSULIN TREATMENT; MALE; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; OSTEOARTHROPATHY; OSTEOMYELITIS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SOFT TISSUE INFECTION;

ADULT; AGED; DIABETIC FOOT; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOMYELITIS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84868212616     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: 16197089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2183-z     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Schwegler B, Stumpe KD, Weishaupt D, Strobel K, Spinas GA, von Schulthess GK, et al. Unsuspected osteomyelitis is frequent in persistent diabetic foot ulcer and better diagnosed by MRI than by 18F-FDG PET or 99mTc-MOAB. J Intern Med. 2008;263:99-106.
2. Berendt AR, Lipsky B. Is this bone infected or not? Differentiating neuro-osteoarthropathy from osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Curr Diab Rep. 2004;4:424-9.
3. Nawaz A, Torigian DA, Siegelman ES, Basu S, Chryssikos T, Alavi A. Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET, MRI, and plain film radiography (PFR) for the diagnosis of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12:335-42.
4. Greenspan A, Stadalnik RC. A musculoskeletal radiologist's view of nuclear medicine. Semin Nucl Med. 1997;27:372-85.
5. Tomas MB, Patel M, Marwin SE, Palestro CJ. The diabetic foot. Br J Radiol. 2000;73:443-50.
6. Familiari D, Glaudemans AW, Vitale V, Prosperi D, Bagni O, Lenza A, et al. Can sequential 18F-FDG PET/CT replace WBC imaging in the diabetic foot? J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1012-9.
7. Capriotti G, Chianelli M, Signore A. Nuclear medicine imaging of diabetic foot infection: results of meta-analysis. Nucl Med Commun. 2006;27:757-64.
8. Zhuang H, Duarte PS, Pourdehnad M, Maes A, Van Acker F, Shnier D, et al. The promising role of 18F-FDG PET in detecting infected lower limb prosthesis implants. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:44-8.
9. De Winter F, Vogelaers D, Gemmel F, Dierckx RA. Promising role of 18-F-fluoro-D-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in clinical infectious diseases. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2002;21:247-57.
10. Bleeker-Rovers CP, de Kleijn EM, Corstens FH, van der Meer JW, Oyen WJ. Clinical value of FDG PET in patients with fever of unknown origin and patients suspected of focal infection or inflammation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:29-37.
11. Zhuang H, Yu JQ, Alavi A. Applications of fluorodeoxyglucose-PET imaging in the detection of infection and inflammation and other benign disorders. Radiol Clin North Am. 2005;43:121-34.
12. Keidar Z, Militianu D, Melamed E, Bar-Shalom R, Israel O. The diabetic foot: initial experience with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:444-9.
13. Lipman BT, Collier BD, Carrera GF, Timins ME, Erickson SJ, Johnson JE, et al. Detection of osteomyelitis in the neuropathic foot: nuclear medicine, MRI and conventional radiography. Clin Nucl Med. 1998;23:77-82.
14. Morrison WB, Schweitzer ME, Batte WG, Radack DP, Russel KM. Osteomyelitis of the foot: relative importance of primary and secondary MR imaging signs. Radiology. 1998;207:625-32.
15. Ledermann HP, Schweitzer ME, Morrison WB. Nonenhancing tissue on MR imaging of pedal infection: characterization of necrotic tissue and associated limitations for diagnosis of osteomyelitis and abscess. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178:215-22.
16. Sella EJ, Grosser DM. Imaging modalities of the diabetic foot. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2003;20:729-40.
17. Stumpe KD, Dazzi H, Schaffner A, von Schulthess GK. Infection imaging using whole-body FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000;27:822-32.
18. Keidar Z, Engel A, Hoffman A, Israel O, Nitecki S. Prosthetic vascular graft infection: the role of 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1230-6.
19. Keidar Z, Gurman-Balbir A, Gaitini D, Israel O. Fever of unknown origin: the role of 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1980-5.
20. Basu S, Chryssikos T, Houseni M, Scot Malay D, Shah J, Zhuang H, et al. Potential role of FDG PET in the setting of diabetic neuroosteoarthropathy: can it differentiate uncomplicated Charcot's neuroarthropathy from osteomyelitis and soft-tissue infection? Nucl Med Commun. 2007;28:465-72.
21. Palestro CJ. 18F-FDG and diabetic foot infections: the verdict is J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1009-11.
22. Hopfner S, Krolak C, Kessler S, Tiling R, Brinkbaumer K, Hahn K, et al. Preoperative imaging of Charcot neuroarthropathy in diabetic patients: comparison of ring PET, hybrid PET, and magnetic resonance imaging. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25:890-5.
23. Zhuang HM, Cortes-Blanco A, Pourdehnad M, Adam LE, Yamamoto AJ, Martinez-Lazaro R, et al. Do high glucose levels have differential effect on FDG uptake in inflammatory and malignant disorders? Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:1123-8.
24. Rabkin Z, Israel O, Keidar Z. Do hyperglycemia and diabetes affect the incidence of false-negative 18F-FDG PET/CT studies in patients evaluated for infection or inflammation and cancer? A comparative analysis. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1015-20.