Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of Nuclear Medicine in Prosthesis Surveillance

  • Chapter
Imaging of Prosthetic Joints

  • 1287 Accesses

Abstract

In the evaluation of painful joint replacements, nuclear medicine plays essentially the role of differentiating aseptic loosening from infection of the prosthesis. Some partial analogies between the pathophysiological frameworks of these two conditions make nonspecific tracers of inflammation unreliable. The bone scan, due to its excellent negative predictive value, can be used as an initial screening test, since no tracer uptake reliably excludes infection. Labeled leukocyte scan combined with marrow imaging or based on multiple time-point analysis to evaluate the normal marrow activity is the scintigraphic method of choice for diagnosing infection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Maloney WJ, Smith RL (1995) Periprosthetic osteolysis in total hip arthroplasties: the role of particulate wear debris. J Bone Joint Surg 77-A:1448–1461

    Google Scholar 

  2. Love C, Tomas MB, Marwin SE et al (2001) Role of nuclear medicine in diagnosis of the infected joint replacement. Radio Graph 21:1229–1238

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Palestro CJ, Love C, Miller TT (2006) Imaging of musculoskeletal infections. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 20:1197–1218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bauer TW, Schils J (1999) The pathology of total joint arthroplasty: II Mechanisms of implant failure. Skeletal Radiol 28:483–497

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wooley PH, Nasser S, Fitzgerald RH Jr (1996) The immune response to implant materials in humans. Clin Orthop 326:63–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Toumbis CA, Kronick JL, Wooley PH et al (1997) Total joint arthroplasty and the immune response. Semin Arthritis Rheum 27:44–47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Spector M, Shortkroff S, Hsu HP et al (1990) Tissue changes around loose prostheses: a canine model to investigate the effects of anti-inflammatory agent. Clin Orthop 261:140–152

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Konttinen YT, Zhao D, Beklen A et al (2005) The microenvironment around the total hip replacement prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 430:28–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Love C, Marwin SE, Palestro CJ (2009) Nuclear medicine and the infected joint replacement. Semin Nucl Med 39:66–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Aliabadi P, Tumeh SS, Weissman BN et al (1989) Cemented total hip prosthesis: radiographic and scintigraphic evaluation. Radiology 173:203–206

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Williamson BRJ, McLaughlin RE, Wang GJ et al (1979) Radionuclide bone imaging as a means of differentiating loosening and infection in patients with a painful total hip prosthesis. Radiology 133:723–726

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Williams F, McCall IW, Park WM et al (1981) Gallium-67 scanning in the painful total hip replacement. Clin Radiol 32:431–439

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mountford PJ, Hall FM, Wells CP et al (1986) 99mTc-MDP, 67 Ga-citrate and 111In-leucocytes for detecting prosthetic hip infection. Nucl Med Commun 7:113–120

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lieberman JR, Huo MH, Schneider R et al (1993) Evaluation of painful hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 75-B:475–478

    Google Scholar 

  15. Utz JA, Lull RJ, Galvin EG (1986) Asymptomatic total hip prosthesis: natural history determined using 99 mTc MDP bone scans. Radiology 161:509–512

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Oswald SG, Van Nostrand D, Savory CG et al (1989) 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 30:1321–1331

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Oswald SG, Van Nostrand D, Savory CG et al (1990) The acetabulum: a prospective study of three-phase bone and indium white blood cell scintigraphy following porous-coated hip arthroplasty. J Nucl Med 31:274–280

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenthall L, Lepanto L, Raymond F (1987) Radiophosphate uptake in asymptomatic knee arthroplasty. J Nucl Med 28:1546–1549

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hofmann AA, Wyatt RWB, Daniels AU et al (1990) Bone scans after total knee arthroplasty in asymptomatic patients. Clin Orthop 251:183–188

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Palestro CJ, Swyer AJ, Kim CK et al (1991) Infected knee prostheses: diagnosis with In-111 leukocyte, Tc-99 m sulfur colloid, and Tc-99 m MDP imaging. Radiology 179:645–648

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Love C, Tronco GG, Yu AK et al (2008) Diagnosing lower extremity (LE) prosthetic joint infection: bone, gallium and labeled leukocyte imaging. Presented at the 2008 SNM Meeting, New Orleans, LA, June 14–18

    Google Scholar 

  22. Reing CM, Richin PF, Kenmore PI (1979) Differential bone-scanning in the evaluation of a painful total joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 61-A:933–936

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rushton N, Coakley AJ, Tudor J et al (1982) The value of technetium and gallium scanning in assessing pain after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg 64-B:313–318

    Google Scholar 

  24. McKillop JH, McKay I, Cuthbert GF et al (1984) Scintigraphy evaluation of the painful prosthetic joint: a comparison of gallium-67 citrate and indium-111 labeled leukocyte imaging. Clin Radiol 35:239–241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Palestro CJ (1994) The current role of gallium imaging in infection. Semin Nucl Med 24:128–141

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tehranzadeh J, Gubernick I, Blaha D (1988) Prospective study of sequential technetium-99 m phosphate and gallium imaging in painful hip prostheses (comparison of diagnostic modalities). Clin Nucl Med 13:229–236

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Palestro CJ, Torres MA (1997) Radionuclide imaging in orthoipedic infections. Semin Nucl 27:334–345

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Palestro CJ, Metha HH, Patel M et al (1998) Marrow versus infection in the Charcot joint: Indium-111 leukocyte and technetium-99 m sulfur colloid scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 39:346–350

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Torres MA, Palestro CJ (1997) Leukocyte-marrow scintigraphy in hyperostosis frontalis interna. J Nucl Med 38:1283–1285

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wukich DK, Abreu SH, Callaghan JJ et al (1987) Diagnosis of infection by preoperative scintigraphy with indium-labeled white blood cells. J Bone Joint Surg 69-A:1353–1360

    Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson JA, Christie MJ, Sandler MP et al (1988) Detection of occult infection following total joint arthroplasty using sequential technetium-99 m HDP bone scintigraphy and indium-111 WBC imaging. J Nucl Med 29:1347–1353

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Palestro CJ, Kim CK, Swyer AJ et al (1990) Total hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic indium-111-labeled leukocyte activity and complementary technetium-99 m-sulfur colloid imaging in suspected infection. J Nucl Med 31:1950–1955

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Love C, Marvin SE, Tomas MB et al (2004) Diagnosing infection in the failed joint replacement: a comparison of coincidence detection fluorine-18 FDG and indium-111-labeled leukocyte/technetium-99 m-sulfur colloid marrow imaging. J Nucl Med 45:1864–1871

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pelosi E, Baiocco C, Pennone M et al (2004) 99mTc-HMPAO-leukocyte scintigraphy in patients with symptomatic total hip or knee arthroplasty: improved diagnostic accuracy by means of semiquantitative evaluation. J Nucl Med 45:438–444

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhuang H, Duarte PS, Pourdehnad M et al (2001) The promising role of 18F-FDG PET in detecting infected lower limb prosthesis implants. J Nucl Med 42:44–48

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chacko TK, Zhuang H, Stevenson K et al (2002) The importance of the location of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in periprostetic infection in painful hip prostheses. Nucl Med Commun 23:851–855

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Reinartz P, Mumme T, Hermanns B et al (2005) Radionuclide imaging of the painful hip arthroplasty. Positron-emission tomography versus triple-phase bone scanning. J Bone Joint Surg 87-B:465–470

    Google Scholar 

  38. Manthey N, Reinhard P, Moog F et al (2002) The use of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to differentiate between synovitis, loosening and infection of hip and knee prostheses. Nuvl Med Commun 23:645–653

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Stumpe KD, Notzli HP, Zanetti M et al (2004) FDG PET for differentiation of infection and aseptic loosening in total hip replacements: comparison with conventional radiography and three-phase bone scintigraphy. Radiology 231:333–341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mayer-Wagner S, Mayer W, Maegerlein S et al (2010) Use of (18)F-FDG-PET in the diagnosis of endoprosthetic loosening of knee and hip implants. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130:1231–1238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Magnuson JE, Brown ML, Hauser MF et al (1988) In-111 labeled leukocyte scintigraphy in suspected orthopedic prosthesis infection: comparison with other imaging modalities. Radiology 168:235–239

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Levitsky KA, Hozack WJ, Balderston RA et al (1991) Evaluation of the painful prosthetic joint. Relative value of bone scan, sedimentation rate, and joint aspiration. J Arthroplasty 6:237–244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Merkel KD, Brown ML, Fitzgerald RH Jr (1986) Sequential technetium-99m HMDP-gallium-67 citrate imaging for the evaluation of infection in the painful prosthesis. J Nucl Med 27:1413–1417

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Gomez-Luzuriaga MA, Galan V, Villar JM (1988) Scintigraphy with Tc, Ga and In in painful total hip prostheses. Int Orthp 12:163–167

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Kraemer WJ, Saplys R, Waddell JP et al (1993) Bone scan, gallium scan, and hip aspiration in the diagnosis of infected total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 8:611–615

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pring DJ, Henderson RG, Keshavarzian A et al (1986) Indium-granulocyte scanning in painful prosthetic joint. AJR Am J Roentgenol 146:167–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mulamba L, Ferrant A, Leners N et al (1983) Indium-III leukocyte scanning in the evaluation of painful hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthpaedica Scandinavia 54:695–697

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Merckel KD, Brown ML, Dewanjee MK et al (1985) Comparison of indium-labeled leukocyte imaging with sequential technetium-gallium scanning in diagnosis of low grade musculoskeletal sepsis: a prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg 67A:465

    Google Scholar 

  49. Pring DJ, Henderson RG, Keshavarzian A et al (1986) Indium-granulocyte scanning in the painful prosthetic joint

    Google Scholar 

  50. Cuckler JM, Star AM, Alavi A et al (1991) Diagnosis and management of the infected total joint arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 22:523–530

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomo-Pathological Sciences, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy

    Mauro Liberatore

Authors
  1. Mauro Liberatore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mauro Liberatore .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Pathology, University of Rome Sapienza, Rome, Italy

    Carlina V. Albanese

  2. Radiodiagnostica CTO, Azienda Ospedaliera Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy

    Carlo Faletti

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Liberatore, M. (2014). Role of Nuclear Medicine in Prosthesis Surveillance. In: Albanese, C.V., Faletti, C. (eds) Imaging of Prosthetic Joints. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5483-7_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5483-7_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-5482-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-5483-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation