Expectations from Nuclear Medicine from the Perspective of an Orthopedist
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Review
P: 8-14
March 2022

Expectations from Nuclear Medicine from the Perspective of an Orthopedist

Nucl Med Semin 2022;8(1):8-14
1. Ege Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Anabilim Dalı, İzmir, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Publish Date: 15.04.2022
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

The diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal tumors and infections are performed with a multidisciplinary approach that combines clinical findings, radiological imaging, nuclear medicine imaging methods and histopathological evaluation. Although primarily radiological imaging methods are used, nuclear medicine imaging methods are also frequently used in clinical practice in this case group. Nuclear imaging methods are used in the diagnosis of bone and soft tissue sarcomas, in the planning of the biopsy area, in the staging phase, in the evaluation of the treatment response, in the follow-up of local recurrence, and metastasis scans. In addition, nuclear imaging methods such as whole-body bone scintigraphy, single photon emission computerized tomography, positron emission tomography (PET), PET/ computerized tomography are used at regular intervals for routine metastasis screening in cases already diagnosed with cancer. Another situation in which nuclear imaging methods are needed is the cases presenting with pathological fractures without known malignancy. In these cases, nuclear imaging methods are frequently used in clinical practice for primary focus investigation and detection of different metastatic foci. In patients with diabetic foot and symptomatic joint replacement prosthesis, septic aseptic separation is a difficult issue, requiring different approaches and treatment planning, and its differential diagnosis is difficult. With classical imaging methods, sufficient information can not be obtained about septic and aseptic separation. At this stage, nuclear imaging emerges as the most important method for diagnosis. In this review, the contribution and importance of nuclear medicine methods in the diagnosis and treatment follow-up of orthopedic diseases are evaluated.

References

1Kim K, Kim SJ. Diagnostic role of PET or PET/CT for prosthetic joint infection: A systematic review and Meta-analysis. Hell J Nucl Med 2021;24:83-93.
2Capriotti G, Chianelli M, Signore A. Nuclear medicine imaging of diabetic foot infection: results of meta-analysis. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:757-764.
3Liu Y, Sheng J, Dong Z, et al. The diagnostic performance of 18F-fluoride PET/CT in bone metastases detection: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 2019;74:196-206.
4Tosun FC, Kemik ve Yumuşak Doku Tümörlerinde Kemik Sintigrafisi ve PET/BT. In: Kemik ve Yumuşak Doku Tümörleri.1. Baskı. Editör Dabak N. Ankara: TOTBİD; 2013. Sayfa:37-70.
5Park SB, Park JM, Moon SH, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients without known primary malignancy with skeletal lesions suspicious for cancer metastasis. PLoS One 2018;13:e0196808.
6Weiss S, Goldblum, J. General considerations. In: Weiss, S.; Goldblum, J., editors. Enzinger and Weiss’s Soft Tissue Tumors. St Louis, Missouri: CV Mosby; 2001:1-19.
7Unni KK, Inwards CY. Dahlin’s Bone Tumors, 6th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010.
8Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn PCW, Mertens F (Eds) WHO Classification of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone. IARC, Lyon, 2013.
9Kaya H, Sabah D, Kececi B, et al. Bone and soft tissue sarcomas epidemiology and general survival characteristics. Ege Journal of Medicine 2019;58:Supplement:88-104.
10Kramer EL, Ko J, Ponzo F, Mourtzikos K. Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography: A Disease-Oriented Approach. Informa HealthCare; 2008.
11Chua S, Gnanasegaran G, Cook GJR. Miscellaneous cancers (lung, thyroid, renal cancer, myeloma, and neuroendocrine tumors): role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 2009;39:416-430.
12Schwarzbach MH, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Willeke F, et al. Clinical value of [18-F]] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Surg 2000;231:380-386.
13Lodge M, Lucas J, Marsden P, et al. A PET study of 18FDG uptake in soft tissue masses. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:22-30.
14Knapp EL, Kransdorf MJ, Letson GD. Diagnostic imaging update: soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer Control 2005;12:22-26.
15McCarville MB, Christie R, Daw NC, Spunt SL, Kaste SC. PET/CT in the evaluation of childhood sarcomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:1293-1304.
16Crettenand F, Martin D, Cherix S, Demartines N, Matter M. Occurrence and prognosis of lymph node metastases in patients selected for isolated limb perfusion with soft tissue sarcoma. J Cancer 2018;9:3311-3315.
17Kumar R, Shandal V, Shamim SA, Halanaik D, Malhotra A. Clinical applications of PET and PET/CT in pediatric malignancies. Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 2010;10:755-768.
18Völker T, Denecke T, Steffen I. Positron emission tomography for staging of pediatric sarcoma patients: results of a prospective multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5435-5441.
19Elmanzalawy A, Vali R, Chavhan GB. The impact of 18F-FDG PET on initial staging and therapy planning of pediatric soft-tissue sarcoma patients. Pediatr Radiol 2020;50:252-260.
20Wagner LM, Kremer N, Gelfand MJ. Detection of lymph node metastases in pediatric and adolescent/young adult sarcoma: sentinel lymph node biopsy versus fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging—a prospective trial. Cancer 2017;123:155-160.
21Lucas JD, O’Doherty MJ, Wong JC. Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of soft-tissue sarcomas. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:441-447.
22Iagaru A, Chawla S, Menendez L, Conti PS. 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT for detection of pulmonary metastases from musculoskeletal sarcomas. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:795-802.
23Hurley C, McCarville MB, Shulkin BL. Comparison of 18F-FDG-PET-CT and bone scintigraphy for evaluation of osseous metastases in newly diagnosed and recurrent osteosarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2016;63:1381-1386.
24Quartuccio N, Treglia G, Salsano M. The role of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in staging and restaging of patients with osteosarcoma. Radiol Oncol 2013;47:97-102.
25Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1356-1367.
26Greenfield GB. Conventional imaging of bone tumors: Its role in the age of CT, MRI, and radionuclide scanning. Contemporary Diagnostic Radiology 1990;13:1-5.
27Cengiz A, Göksel S, Yürekli Y. Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther 2018;27:126.
28Iyer RS, Chapman T, Chew FS. Pediatric bone imaging: diagnostic imaging of osteoid osteoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198:1039-1052.
29Bredella MA, Torriani M, Hornicek F. Value of PET in the assessment of patients with neurofibromatosis type 1. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:928-935.
30Ulbrecht JS, Cavanagh PR, Caputo GM. Foot problems in diabetes: an overview. Clin Infect Dis 2004;39:S73-S82.
31Glaudemans AWJM, Uçkay I, Lipsky BA. Challenges in diagnosing infection in the diabetic foot. Diabet Med 2015;32:748-759.
32Oto M. Diyabetik Ayakta Osteomiyelit Ayırıcı Tanısındaki Klinik ve Laboratuvar Güçlükler, Nükleer Tıptan Beklentiler. Nükleer Tıp Seminerleri 2016;2:90-94.
33Heiba S, Knešaurek K. Evaluation of diabetic foot infection in nuclear medicine. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;61:283-291.
34Koob S, Gaertner FC, Jansen TR, et al. Diagnosis of peri-prosthetic loosening of total hip and knee arthroplasty using 18F-Fluoride PET/CT. Oncotarget 2019;10:2203-2211.
35Yaylalı O. Ortopedik Protez Enfeksiyonlarında Moleküler Görüntüleme Yöntemlerinin Rolü. Nükleer Tıp Seminerleri 2016;4:110-122.
36Levitsky 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;6:237-244.
37Figa R, Veloso M, Bernaus M, et al. Should scintigraphy be completely excluded from the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection? Clin Radiol 2020;75:797,e1-797-e7.
38Diaz-Ledezma C, Lamberton C, Lichstein P, Parvizi J. Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: the role of nuclear medicine may be overestimated. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:1044-1049.
39Love C, Marwin SE, Palestro CJ. Nuclear medicine and the infected joint replacement. Semin Nucl Med 2009;39:66-78.
Article is only available in PDF format. Show PDF
2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House