Diagnosing a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be difficult. Several imaging modalities are available, but the choice which technique to use is often based on local expertise, availability and costs. Some centers prefer to use 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) as first imaging modality of choice, but due to a lack of accurate interpretation criteria, FDG-PET is currently not routinely applied for diagnosing PJI. With FDG-PET it is difficult to differentiate between FDG uptake due to reactive inflammation and uptake due to an infection. Since the physiological uptake pattern around a joint prosthesis is not fully elucidated, the aim of this study was to determine: i) the FDG uptake pattern in non-infected total hip prostheses and, ii) to evaluate whether there is a difference in uptake between cemented and non-cemented prostheses. Patients with a primary total hip arthroplasty (1995–2016) without clinical signs of an infection that underwent a FDG-PET for another indication (mainly suspicion of malignancy) were included and retrospectively analysed. Patients in whom the prosthesis was implanted < 6 months prior to FDG-PET were excluded, to avoid post-surgical effects. Scans were visually and quantitatively analysed. Quantitative analysis was performed by calculating maximum and peak standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVpeak) by volume of interests (VOIs) at eight different locations around the prosthesis, from which the mean SUV was calculated. SUV was standardized by the liver SUV that was taken as background.Aim
Method
