BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) infections are life-threatening complications. The diagnosis can be difficult to establish. Our purpose is to evaluate the diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET. METHODS: Forty patients who received work-up for suspected CIED infection were retrospectively included (group 1) and compared with 40 controls (group 2); CIED patients were referred for oncologic PET. PET-CT data were blindly assessed. Interpretation was based on visual analysis of both attenuation-corrected and non-corrected images and a semi-quantitative analysis was performed. The gold standard was bacteriological data of explanted devices or clinical follow-up for at least 1 year. RESULTS: Infection was present in 18 out of 40 patients of group 1. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of PET-CT were 83%, 95%, 94%, and 88%, respectively. Accuracy was 90%. PET-CT revealed the presence of additional pathological hypermetabolic foci in 28% of cases. PET-CT was negative at implanted devices in all patients of group 2. CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET-CT is helpful in the work-up of suspected CIED infections. It is a potential tool to make the accurate diagnosis of CIED infection and to assess the extent of infection. The promising results in this indication need to be validated in a prospective multicenter study.
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIED) infections are life-threatening complications. The diagnosis can be difficult to establish. Our purpose is to evaluate the diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET. METHODS: Forty patients who received work-up for suspected CIED infection were retrospectively included (group 1) and compared with 40 controls (group 2); CIED patients were referred for oncologic PET. PET-CT data were blindly assessed. Interpretation was based on visual analysis of both attenuation-corrected and non-corrected images and a semi-quantitative analysis was performed. The gold standard was bacteriological data of explanted devices or clinical follow-up for at least 1 year. RESULTS:Infection was present in 18 out of 40 patients of group 1. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of PET-CT were 83%, 95%, 94%, and 88%, respectively. Accuracy was 90%. PET-CT revealed the presence of additional pathological hypermetabolic foci in 28% of cases. PET-CT was negative at implanted devices in all patients of group 2. CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET-CT is helpful in the work-up of suspected CIED infections. It is a potential tool to make the accurate diagnosis of CIED infection and to assess the extent of infection. The promising results in this indication need to be validated in a prospective multicenter study.
Authors: Jean-François Sarrazin; François Philippon; Michel Tessier; Jean Guimond; Franck Molin; Jean Champagne; Isabelle Nault; Louis Blier; Maxime Nadeau; Lyne Charbonneau; Mikaël Trottier; Gilles O'Hara Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Andor W J M Glaudemans; Erik F J de Vries; Filippo Galli; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Riemer H J A Slart; Alberto Signore Journal: Clin Dev Immunol Date: 2013-08-21
Authors: Luiz Eduardo Mastrocola; Barbara Juarez Amorim; João Vicente Vitola; Simone Cristina Soares Brandão; Gabriel Blacher Grossman; Ronaldo de Souza Leão Lima; Rafael Willain Lopes; William Azem Chalela; Lara Cristiane Terra Ferreira Carreira; José Roberto Nolasco de Araújo; Cláudio Tinoco Mesquita; José Claudio Meneghetti Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 2.000