PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in patients with painful total knee arthroplasty and to relate FDG uptake to the location of soft tissue pain. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with painful total knee arthroplasty had a clinical examination, standard radiographs, CT measurement of rotation of the femoral component and FDG-PET (18 PET/CT, 10 PET). The diagnosis of infection was based on microbiological examinations of surgical specimens (n=12) or clinical follow-up for at least 6 months (n=16), 99mTc-labelled monoclonal antibody scintigraphy and joint aspiration. RESULTS: Twenty-seven of 28 patients presented with diffuse synovial FDG uptake. Additional focal extrasynovial FDG uptake was observed in 19 knees. Twenty-four of the 28 patients had a diagnosis of internal femoral malrotation. The remaining four patients showed no rotation (0 degrees) and 3 degrees, 4 degrees and 7 degrees of external rotation, respectively. Three patients presented with the additional diagnosis of an infected total knee replacement. Pain was described as diffuse (n=10) or focal (n=18). In two knees a relationship between pain location and FDG uptake was observed. Of ten patients with a severe internal femoral component rotation (>6 degrees), seven had focal uptake, four in the femoral periosteum and three in the tibial periosteum. The difference between knees with severe malrotation and the remaining knees was not significant (p=1.000, Fisher's Exact Test). CONCLUSION: Diffuse synovial and focal extrasynovial FDG-PET uptake is commonly found in patients with malrotation of the femoral component and is not related to pain location. The information provided by FDG-PET does not contribute to the diagnosis and management of individual patients with persistent pain after total knee replacement.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in patients with painful total knee arthroplasty and to relate FDG uptake to the location of soft tissue pain. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with painful total knee arthroplasty had a clinical examination, standard radiographs, CT measurement of rotation of the femoral component and FDG-PET (18 PET/CT, 10 PET). The diagnosis of infection was based on microbiological examinations of surgical specimens (n=12) or clinical follow-up for at least 6 months (n=16), 99mTc-labelled monoclonal antibody scintigraphy and joint aspiration. RESULTS: Twenty-seven of 28 patients presented with diffuse synovial FDG uptake. Additional focal extrasynovial FDG uptake was observed in 19 knees. Twenty-four of the 28 patients had a diagnosis of internal femoral malrotation. The remaining four patients showed no rotation (0 degrees) and 3 degrees, 4 degrees and 7 degrees of external rotation, respectively. Three patients presented with the additional diagnosis of an infected total knee replacement. Pain was described as diffuse (n=10) or focal (n=18). In two knees a relationship between pain location and FDG uptake was observed. Of ten patients with a severe internal femoral component rotation (>6 degrees), seven had focal uptake, four in the femoral periosteum and three in the tibial periosteum. The difference between knees with severe malrotation and the remaining knees was not significant (p=1.000, Fisher's Exact Test). CONCLUSION: Diffuse synovial and focal extrasynovial FDG-PET uptake is commonly found in patients with malrotation of the femoral component and is not related to pain location. The information provided by FDG-PET does not contribute to the diagnosis and management of individual patients with persistent pain after total knee replacement.
Authors: Marc Schiesser; Katrin D M Stumpe; Otmar Trentz; Thomas Kossmann; Gustav K Von Schulthess Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Katrin D M Stumpe; Hubert P Nötzli; Marco Zanetti; Ehab M Kamel; Thomas F Hany; Gerhard W Görres; Gustav K von Schulthess; Juerg Hodler Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-03-24 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Filip Gemmel; Hans Van den Wyngaert; Charito Love; M M Welling; Paul Gemmel; Christopher J Palestro Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-02-24 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Christopher J Burke; William R Walter; Sushma Gaddam; Hien Pham; James S Babb; Joseph Sanger; Fabio Ponzo Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Steven J Verberne; Remko J A Sonnega; Olivier P P Temmerman; Pieter G Raijmakers Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Luis A Diaz; Catherine A Foss; Katherine Thornton; Sridhar Nimmagadda; Christopher J Endres; Ovsev Uzuner; Thorsten M Seyler; Slif D Ulrich; Janet Conway; Chetan Bettegowda; Nishant Agrawal; Ian Cheong; Xiaosong Zhang; Paul W Ladenson; Barry N Vogelstein; Michael A Mont; Shibin Zhou; Kenneth W Kinzler; Bert Vogelstein; Martin G Pomper Journal: PLoS One Date: 2007-10-10 Impact factor: 3.240