OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to examine the degree and pattern of (18)F-FDG uptake within the shoulder as a potential marker of joint inflammation or injury. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients undergoing (18)F-FDG PET for clinical oncologic assessment completed questionnaires regarding history of shoulder disease, trauma, pain, and/or functional impairment. Thorough physical examination of the shoulder was performed. A clinical diagnosis of specific shoulder derangement or normal was established for each patient. PET scans were evaluated blindly by a nuclear medicine physician and a musculoskeletal radiologist qualitatively for location, distribution, and intensity of shoulder uptake. Standardized uptake values (SUV) were measured. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients had shoulder PET findings. Fourteen had clinical findings consistent with a specific diagnosis in the PET-positive shoulder. The remaining seven PET-positive patients were clinically normal. Three recognizable patterns of uptake were appreciable. Eight of 10 patients with diffuse uptake had findings of osteoarthritis (n = 7) or bursitis (n = 1). Two of four patients with focal greater tuberosity uptake had findings of rotator cuff injury. Two of four patients with focal glenoid uptake had findings of frozen shoulder. SUV showed a positive correlation with subject age (p < 0.01), but no association with clinical findings was identified. CONCLUSION: The pattern of FDG uptake within the shoulder may point to specific clinical entities. While focal uptake is less reliably related to clinical findings, diffuse uptake is associated with signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis or bursitis.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to examine the degree and pattern of (18)F-FDG uptake within the shoulder as a potential marker of joint inflammation or injury. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients undergoing (18)F-FDG PET for clinical oncologic assessment completed questionnaires regarding history of shoulder disease, trauma, pain, and/or functional impairment. Thorough physical examination of the shoulder was performed. A clinical diagnosis of specific shoulder derangement or normal was established for each patient. PET scans were evaluated blindly by a nuclear medicine physician and a musculoskeletal radiologist qualitatively for location, distribution, and intensity of shoulder uptake. Standardized uptake values (SUV) were measured. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients had shoulder PET findings. Fourteen had clinical findings consistent with a specific diagnosis in the PET-positive shoulder. The remaining seven PET-positive patients were clinically normal. Three recognizable patterns of uptake were appreciable. Eight of 10 patients with diffuse uptake had findings of osteoarthritis (n = 7) or bursitis (n = 1). Two of four patients with focal greater tuberosity uptake had findings of rotator cuff injury. Two of four patients with focal glenoid uptake had findings of frozen shoulder. SUV showed a positive correlation with subject age (p < 0.01), but no association with clinical findings was identified. CONCLUSION: The pattern of FDG uptake within the shoulder may point to specific clinical entities. While focal uptake is less reliably related to clinical findings, diffuse uptake is associated with signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis or bursitis.
Authors: Joyce C Mhlanga; John A Carrino; Martin Lodge; Hao Wang; Richard L Wahl Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Abhijit J Chaudhari; William Y Raynor; Ali Gholamrezanezhad; Thomas J Werner; Chamith S Rajapakse; Abass Alavi Journal: PET Clin Date: 2021-01