Radionuclide Imaging of Musculoskeletal Infections

  • Katrin D. M. Stumpe


Conventional nuclear medicine offers a variety of different methods for the diagnosis of musculoskeletal infections, including three-phase bone scintigraphy, gallium imaging, and labeled leukocyte imaging with indium-111 (111In)-oxine or Tc-99-hexamethyl-propyleneamine oxime (HMPAO) and labeled antibodies against leukocyte surface antigens (antigranulocyte antibodies). However, most of the conventional radionuclide imaging techniques are of low specificity in the detection of low-grade and chronic infections, especially in the axial skeleton due to high physiological uptake in normal bone marrow of the spine.


Bone Scintigraphy Aseptic Loosening Chronic Osteomyelitis Musculoskeletal Infection Pyogenic Vertebral Osteomyelitis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Termaat MF, Raijmakers PG, Scholten HJ et al (2005) The accuracy of diagnostic imaging for the assessment of chronic osteomyelitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2464–2471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schauwecker DS (1992) The scintigraphic diagnosis of osteomyelitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 158:9–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Meyers SP, Wiener SN (1991) Diagnosis of hematogenous pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis by magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Intern Med 151:683–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chung JK, Yeo J, Lee DS et al (1996) Bone marrow scintigraphy using technetium-99m-antigranulocyte antibody in hematologic disorders. J Nucl Med 37:978–982PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jacobson AF, Gilles CP, Cerqueira MD (1992) Photopenic defects in marrow-containing skeleton on indium-111 leucocyte scintigraphy: prevalence at sites suspected of osteomyelitis and as an incidental finding. Eur J Nucl Med 19:858–864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gratz S, Braun HG, Behr TM et al (1997) Photopenia in chronic vertebral osteomyelitis with technetium-99m-antigranulocyte antibody (BW 250/183). J Nucl Med 38:211–216PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Palestro CJ, Torres MA (1997) Radionuclide imaging in orthopedic infections. Semin Nucl Med 27:334–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mulamba L, Ferrant A, Leners N et al (1983) Indium-111 leucocyte scanning in the evaluation of painful hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 54:695–697CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Palestro CJ, Kim CK, Swyer AJ et al (1990) Total-hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic indium-111-labeled leukocyte activity and complementary technetium-99m-sulfur colloid imaging in suspected infection. J Nucl Med 31:1950–1955PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Palestro CJ, Roumanas P, Swyer AJ et al (1992) Diagnosis of musculoskeletal infection using combined In-111 labeled leukocyte and Tc-99m SC marrow imaging. Clin Nucl Med 17:269–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Love C, Marwin SE, Tomas MB et al (2004) Diagnosing infection in the failed joint replacement: a comparison of coincidence detection 18F-FDG and 111 In-labeled leukocyte/ 99mTc-sulfur colloid marrow imaging. J Nucl Med 45:1864–1871PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stumpe KD, Dazzi H, Schaffner A, von Schulthess GK (2000) Infection imaging using whole-body FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med 27:822–832CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Babior BM (1984) The respiratory burst of phagocytes. J Clin Invest 73:599–601CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaim AH, Weber B, Kurrer MO et al (2002) Autoradiographic quantification of 18F-FDG uptake in experimental soft-tissue abscesses in rats. Radiology 223:446–451CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guhlmann A, Brecht-Krauss D, Suger G et al (1998) Chronic osteomyelitis: detection with FDG PET and correlation with histopathologic findings. Radiology 206:749–754PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhuang H, Duarte PS, Pourdehand M et al (2000) Exclusion of chronic osteomyelitis with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic imaging. Clin Nucl Med 25:281–284CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chacko TK, Zhuang H, Nakhoda KZ et al (2003) Applications of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of infection. Nucl Med Commun 24:615–624CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guhlmann A, Brecht-Krauss D, Suger G et al (1998) Fluorine-18-FDG PET and technetium-99m antigranulocyte antibody scintigraphy in chronic osteomyelitis. J Nucl Med 39:2145–2152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Winter F, van de Wiele C, Vogelaers D et al (2001) Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-position emission tomography: a highly accurate imaging modality for the diagnosis of chronic musculoskeletal infections. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A:651–660PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hartmann A, Eid K, Dora C et al (2006) Diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in trauma patients with suspected chronic osteomyelitis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34:704–714CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schiesser M, Stumpe KD, Trentz O et al (2003) Detection of metallic implant-associated infections with FDG PET in patients with trauma: correlation with microbiologic results. Radiology 226:391–398CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De Winter F, Gemmel F, Van De Wiele C et al (2003) 18-Fluorine fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the diagnosis of infection in the postoperative spine. Spine 28:1314–1319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chatha DS, Cunningham PM, Schweitzer ME (2005) MR imaging of the diabetic foot: diagnostic challenges. Radiol Clin North Am 43:747–759, ixCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Palestro CJ, Tomas MB (2000) Scintigraphic evaluation of the diabetic foot. In: Freeman LM (ed) Nuclear Medicine Annual: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 143–172Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Newman LG, Waller J, Palestro CJ et al (1991) Unsuspected osteomyelitis in diabetic foot ulcers. Diagnosis and monitoring by leukocyte scanning with indium in 111 oxyquinoline. Jama 266:1246–1251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Keidar Z, Militianu D, Melamed E et al (2005) The diabetic foot: initial experience with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 46:444–449PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schwegler B, Stumpe KD, Weishaupt D et al (2008) 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 263:99–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Modic MT, Feiglin DH, Piraino DW et al (1985) Vertebral osteomyelitis: assessment using MR. Radiology 157:157–166PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stumpe KD, Zanetti M, Weishaupt D et al (2002) FDG positron emission tomography for differentiation of degenerative and infectious endplate abnormalities in the lumbar spine detected on MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1151–1157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schmitz A, Risse JH, Grunwald F et al (2001) Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography findings in spondylodiscitis: preliminary results. Eur Spine J 10:534–539CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gratz S, Dorner J, Fischer U et al (2002) 18F-FDG hybrid PET in patients with suspected spondylitis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 29:516–524CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wendling D, Blagosklonov O, Streit G et al (2005) FDG-PET/CT scan of inflammatory spondylodiscitis lesions in ankylosing spondylitis, and short term evolution during antitumour necrosis factor treatment. Ann Rheum Dis 64:1663–1665CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chew FS, Kline MJ (2001) Diagnostic yield of CT-guided percutaneous aspiration procedures in suspected spontaneous infectious diskitis. Radiology 218:211–214PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    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 6:237–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    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 231:333–341CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Goerres GW, Ziegler SI, Burger C et al (2003) Artifacts at PET and PET/CT caused by metallic hip prosthetic material. Radiology 226:577–584CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    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 42:44–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    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 Br 87:465–470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stumpe KD, Romero J, Ziegler O et al (2006) The value of FDG-PET in patients with painful total knee arthroplasty. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33:1218–1225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Manthey N, Reinhard P, Moog F et al (2002) The use of [18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to differentiate between synovitis, loosening and infection of hip and knee prostheses. Nucl Med Commun 23:645–653CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Love C, Tomas MB, Marwin SE et al (2001) Role of nuclear medicine in diagnosis of the infected joint replacement. Radiographics 21:1229–1238PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Chryssikos T, Parvizi J, Ghanem E et al (2008) FDG-PET imaging can diagnose periprosthetic infection of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:1338–1342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ovadia D, Metser U, Lievshitz G et al (2007) Back pain in adolescents: assessment with integrated 18F-fluoride positron-emission tomography-computed tomography. J Pediatr Orthop 27:90–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lim R, Fahey FH, Drubach LA et al (2007) Early experience with fluorine-18 sodium fluoride bone PET in young patients with back pain. J Pediatr Orthop 27:277–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Forrest N, Welch A, Murray AD et al (2006) Femoral head viability after Birmingham resurfacing hip arthroplasty: assessment with use of [18F] fluoride positron emission tomography. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88 Suppl 3:84–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Stumpe KD (2007) PET and PET/CT Imaging in infection and inflammation. In: Wahl RL (ed) Categorical course in diagnostic radiology: clinical PET and PET/CT imaging syllabus. The Radiological Society of North America, pp 185–201Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katrin D. M. Stumpe
    • 1
  1. 1.Nuclear Medicine, Department of Medical RadiologyUniversity HospitalZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations