| Literature DB >> 26436093 |
Henrik Lundblad1, Gerald Q Maguire2, Charlotte Karlsson-Thur1, Cathrine Jonsson3, Marilyn E Noz4, Michael P Zeleznik5, Hans Jacobsson1, Lars Weidenhielm1.
Abstract
Eighteen consecutive patients, treated with a Taylor Spatial Frame for complex tibia conditions, gave their informed consent to undergo Na(18)F(-) PET/CT bone scans. We present a Patlak-like analysis utilizing an approximated blood time-activity curve eliminating the need for blood aliquots. Additionally, standardized uptake values (SUV) derived from dynamic acquisitions were compared to this Patlak-like approach. Spherical volumes of interest (VOIs) were drawn to include broken bone, other (normal) bone, and muscle. The SUV m (t) (m = max, mean) and a series of slopes were computed as (SUV m (t i ) - SUV m (t j ))/(t i - t j ), for pairs of time values t i and t j . A Patlak-like analysis was performed for the same time values by computing ((VOI p (t i )/VOI e (t i ))-(VOI p (t j )/VOI e (t j )))/(t i - t j ), where p = broken bone, other bone, and muscle and e = expected activity in a VOI. Paired comparisons between Patlak-like and SUV m slopes showed good agreement by both linear regression and correlation coefficient analysis (r = 84%, r s = 78%-SUVmax, r = 92%, and r s = 91%-SUVmean), suggesting static scans could substitute for dynamic studies. Patlak-like slope differences of 0.1 min(-1) or greater between examinations and SUVmax differences of ~5 usually indicated good remodeling progress, while negative Patlak-like slope differences of -0.06 min(-1) usually indicated poor remodeling progress in this cohort.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26436093 PMCID: PMC4575986 DOI: 10.1155/2015/574705
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Patient description (N/A means not applicable).
| Patient | Age | Sex | Days first PET/CT | Days second PET/CT | Reason | Resolution | Days TSF applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 64 | M | 274 | N/A | Refracture in segmental tibial left | TSF extraction | 328 |
| P1 | 64 | 43 | 146 | New TSF as fractures not healing | 168 | ||
|
| |||||||
| P1 | 64 | M | 374 | 400 | New fracture between former two | Former two fractures remodeling | N/A |
|
| |||||||
| P2 | 36 | M | 135 | N/A | Pseudarthrosis right lower leg | TSF extraction healed | 211 |
| P3 | 52 | M | 40 | 84 | Fracture healing in left leg | 167 | |
| P4 | 44 | M | 50 | 122 | Pseudarthrosis right lower leg | 161 | |
| P5 | 35 | M | 43 | 85 | Genu varum, pseudoachondroplasia | 182 | |
| P6 | 17 | F | 52 | 94 | Reduction malformation right leg | 345 | |
|
| |||||||
| P7 | 31 | M | 48 | 129 | Osteomyelitis right lower leg fracture | Leg amputated, continued infection | 226 |
|
| |||||||
| P8 | 28 | M | 60 | 184 | Pseudarthrosis left lower leg | Patient did not heal, new operation | N/A |
|
| |||||||
| P8 | 28 | M | 288 | 363 | Reoperated no new TSF was applied | TSF extraction healed, dancing | 413 |
|
| |||||||
| P9 | 45 | F | 50 | 91 | Nonunion/pseudarthrosis distal tibia/pilon fracture right distal tibia | CT, nonunion, plane film X-ray | N/A |
|
| |||||||
| P9 | 45 | F | 224 | 294 | Reoperated no new TSF was applied | TSF extraction healed | 355 |
| P10 | 33 | M | 42 | 90 | Fracture varus deformity + lengthening | 106 | |
| P11 | 68 | F | 43 | 87 | Wound autologous bone grafting | 156 | |
| P12 | 35 | M | 48 | 104 | Severe bow deformities of tibiae | 151 | |
| P13 | 30 | M | 44 | 89 | Varus deformity and lengthening | 100 | |
| P14 | 21 | F | 48 | 94 | Genu valgum, valgus deformity | 115 | |
|
| |||||||
| P15 | 52 | M | 52 | 93 | Pseudoarthrosis, osteotomy | Patient not remodeling as expected | N/A |
|
| |||||||
| P15 | 52 | M | 148 | N/A | Reoperated no new TSF was applied | Ongoing TSF with ultrasound of bone | N/A |
|
| |||||||
| P16 | 40 | M | 145 | 184 | Proximal tibia fracture, varus deformity, original scan delayed | TSF extraction healed, returned for a second scan 35 after removal | 149 |
|
| |||||||
| P17 | 70 | M | 48 | 82 | Comminuted distal tibial fracture | TSF extraction healed | 147 |
| P18 | 29 | M | 44 | 83 | 199 | ||
PET and CT reconstruction parameters.
| Modality | Resolution | Pixel size (mm) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | Reconstruction |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| PET | Dynamic list mode | OSEM2D | 168 | 168 | 74 | 4.07 | 4.07 | 3.00 |
|
| ||||||||
| CT | 120/140 kVp, 50/60 mAs 0.5/1.0 second per revolution 1.0 pitch | Attenuation correction | 512 | 512 | 74 | 1.37 | 1.37 | 3.00 |
Figure 1The SUVmean data is shown to be nearly normal, especially for the intervals 11 to 35 and 8 to 45 minutes.
Figure 2Plot of Patlak-like slope versus SUVmean for different time intervals with regression line superimposed, showing a linear relation between the two values.
Summary of findings for all patients. Lo indicates distal tibia, Up indicates proximal tibia, L means left leg, and R means right leg. All SUV values at 45 minutes.
| Patient | Days after TSF surgery | Operated leg SUVmax | Operated leg SUVmean | Patlak-like slope for operated leg at (45, 8) minutes−1 | SUVmean slope at (45, 8) minutes−1 | Nonoperated leg SUVmax |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 270 | 38.82 | 8.54 | 0.176 | 0.0024 | 2.63 |
| P1-Lo | 43 | 38.35 | 9.38 | 0.18 | 0.028 | 3.35 |
| 146 | 48.18 | 11.00 | 0.21 | 0.0029 | 2.04 | |
| 374 | 47.24 | 9.50 | 0.21 | 0.0027 | 3.28 | |
| 400 | 42.74 | 7.71 | 0.15 | 0.0023 | 2.80 | |
| P1-Up | 43 | 54.00 | 14.60 | 0.32 | 0.0043 | 3.35 |
| 374 | 42.37 | 11.01 | 0.33 | 0.0028 | 3.28 | |
| 400 | 21.23 | 6.66 | 0.28 | 0.0021 | 2.80 | |
|
| ||||||
| P2 | 133 | 26.23 | 6.65 | 0.13 | 0.0017 | 2.83 |
|
| ||||||
| P3 | 39 | 71.13 | 26.56 | 0.40 | 0.0072 | 3.33 |
| 83 | 56.62 | 19.98 | 0.33 | 0.0055 | 2.60 | |
|
| ||||||
| P4 | 49 | 58.38 | 21.11 | 0.36 | 0.0060 | 2.42 |
| 119 | 42.80 | 15.87 | 0.23 | 0.0043 | 3.22 | |
|
| ||||||
| P5-R | 42 | 29.46 | 5.72 | 0.15 | 0.0013 | 4.37 |
| 83 | 48.58 | 6.47 | 0.18 | 0.0016 | 3.25 | |
| P5-L | 42 | 35.04 | 5.84 | 0.16 | 0.0014 | 4.61 |
| 83 | 36.91 | 7.64 | 0.23 | 0.0020 | 2.53 | |
|
| ||||||
| P6 | 92 | 42.04 | 8.81 | 0.15 | 0.0022 | 3.15 |
|
| ||||||
| P7 | 47 | 29.12 | 10.88 | 0.15 | 0.0025 | 3.20 |
| 128 | 27.27 | 11.59 | 0.15 | 0.0028 | 2.91 | |
|
| ||||||
| P8 | 61 | 31.05 | 7.26 | 0.14 | 0.0016 | 2.00 |
| 183 | 36.01 | 7.37 | 0.15 | 0.0018 | 2.20 | |
| 288 | 35.90 | 9.64 | 0.22 | 0.0027 | 1.50 | |
| 363 | 24.93 | 5.02 | 0.10 | 0.0013 | 3.33 | |
|
| ||||||
| P9 | 294 | 22.50 | 8.27 | 0.22 | 0.0025 | 2.97 |
|
| ||||||
| P10 | 42 | 80.03 | 22.40 | 0.38 | 0.0060 | 2.94 |
| 90 | 81.05 | 31.32 | 0.50 | 0.0084 | 1.54 | |
|
| ||||||
| P11 | 43 | 55.33 | 12.88 | 0.33 | 0.0040 | 2.08 |
| 87 | 29.35 | 7.81 | 0.21 | 0.0024 | 1.29 | |
|
| ||||||
| P12 | 48 | 51.91 | 13.07 | 0.31 | 0.0033 | 3.94 |
| 104 | 42.38 | 14.53 | 0.37 | 0.0039 | 3.24 | |
|
| ||||||
| P13-Lo | 44 | 19.46 | 4.88 | 0.10 | 0.0010 | 1.50 |
| 89 | 41.23 | 8.43 | 0.18 | 0.0021 | 2.73 | |
|
| ||||||
| P14-Lo | 48 | 51.50 | 11.46 | 0.25 | 0.0030 | 1.18 |
| P14-Up | 94 | 16.19 | 5.67 | 0.07 | 0.0017 | 2.47 |
|
| ||||||
| P15-Lo | 52 | 36.01 | 12.55 | 0.26 | 0.0030 | 2.57 |
| 93 | 42.14 | 15.37 | 0.33 | 0.0040 | 2.59 | |
| 148 | 25.29 | 11.75 | 0.25 | 0.0030 | 3.78 | |
| P15-Up | 52 | 18.22 | 3.35 | 0.17 | 0.0058 | 2.57 |
| 93 | 20.80 | 8.00 | 0.12 | 0.0020 | 2.59 | |
| 148 | 21.07 | 6.25 | 0.05 | 0.0016 | 3.78 | |
|
| ||||||
| P16 | 145 | 33.99 | 11.55 | 0.28 | 0.0035 | 3.47 |
| 184 | 31.26 | 10.01 | 0.23 | 0.0038 | 1.81 | |
|
| ||||||
| P17 | 48 | 33.88 | 13.67 | 0.19 | 0.0033 | 3.15 |
| 82 | 33.30 | 9.95 | 0.16 | 0.0026 | 2.27 | |
|
| ||||||
| P18 | 44 | 15.55 | 3.98 | 0.06 | 0.0007 | 1.35 |
| 83 | 18.53 | 5.05 | 0.08 | 0.0009 | 1.38 | |
Figure 3(a) VOI(t )/VOI(t ) for p = broken bone, other bone, and muscle as a function of time since the injection for Patient 9 for two different estimates of total blood volume. (b) shows the same ratio for only other bone and muscle. The line shows that VOImuscle(t )/VOI(t ) at both blood volumes is close to one.
Figure 4Patlak-like curves for Patient 8 before (days after TSF attachment 61 and 183) and after revision surgery (days after TSF attachment 288 and 363).
Figure 5Patlak-like curves for Patient 1 at five different points in time, both before and after removal of the TSF.
Figure 6Patlak-like analysis of Patient 7 who had recurrent osteomyelitis in fracture region shows a rapid uptake of 18F− initially, with the onset of the reduced rate of uptake very early in the 45-minute interval.