Affordable Access

Publisher Website

Use of 18F-fluoride PET to determine the appropriate tissue sampling region for improved sensitivity of tissue examinations in cases of suspected periprosthetic infection after total hip arthroplasty

Acta Orthopaedica
Informa UK (Taylor & Francis)
Publication Date
DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2011.594232
  • Article
  • Biology
  • Medicine


Background and purpose The accurate diagnosis of periprosthetic infection requires assessment of intraoperative tissues. These must be sampled from the appropriate sites. We used 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography (PET) to identify sites of inflammation in order to improve the sensitivity of histopathology, microbiological culture, and real-time PCR in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients. Patients and methods 23 THA patients (23 hips) scheduled for revision surgery (the revision group) and 17 uninfected THA patients (23 hips; control group) were enrolled. Uptake was classified into major, minor, and no uptake. To evaluate the association between the 18F-fluoride uptake and intraoperative tissue results in the revision group, we calculated their sensitivity on each of the major, minor, and no-uptake sides. Results 17 revision patients showed major uptake and all were diagnosed as having septic loosening from intraoperative tissue results. Minor uptake was observed in the other 6 revision patients and all were diagnosed as having aseptic loosening. Apart from 3 cases that showed minor uptake regions, control subjects showed no uptake. In the revision group, the sensitivities of histopathology, microbiological culture, real-time PCR separately and also in combination were 0.78, 0.58, 0.96, and 0.96, respectively, on the major 18F-fluoride uptake sides, 0.0, 0.0, 0.1, and 0.1 on the minor-uptake sides, and 0, 0, 0.18, and 0.18 on the no-uptake sides. Interpretation Our findings suggest that preoperative assessment of major uptake of 18F-fluoride markedly improves the accuracy of tissue sampling, and thus the sensitivity of subsequent tissue examinations. More definitive diagnosis of periprosthetic infection is therefore possible.

There are no comments yet on this publication. Be the first to share your thoughts.