Eline I Reinders Folmer1, Gerdine C I Von Meijenfeldt1, Maarten J Van der Laan1, Andor W J M Glaudemans2, Riemer H J A Slart3, Ben R Saleem1, Clark J Zeebregts4. 1. Department of Surgery (Division of Vascular Surgery), University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Photonic Imaging, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Surgery (Division of Vascular Surgery), University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: c.j.a.m.zeebregts@umcg.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vascular graft infection (VGI), a serious complication in vascular surgery, has a high morbidity and mortality rate. The diagnosis is complicated by non-specific symptoms and challenged by the variable accuracy of different imaging techniques. The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of various imaging techniques to diagnose VGI. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Data sources included PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane from January 1997 until October 2017. Observational cohort studies were included. A meta-analysis was conducted on several imaging modalities: computed tomography with or without angiography (CT(A)), 18F-fluoro-d-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography with or without low dose or contrast enhanced CT (FDG-PET(/CT)), and white blood cell scintigraphy with or without single photon emission computed tomography combined with low dose CT (WBC (SPECT/CT)). RESULTS: Of 4259 papers, 14 articles were included, containing eight prospective and six retrospective articles. CTA (I2 7.4%), FDG-PET (I2 36.5%), and FDG-PET/CT (I2 36.6%) showed negligible to moderate heterogeneity, while WBC scintigraphy ± SPECT/CT (I2 78.6%) showed considerable heterogeneity. Pooled sensitivity for CTA was 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.75), in contrast to FDG-PET of 0.94 (95% CI 0.88-0.98), FDG-PET/CT of 0.95 (95% CI 0.87-0.99), WBC scintigraphy of 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.94), and WBC scintigraphy with SPECT/CT of 0.99 (95% CI 0.92-1.00). The pooled specificities were for CTA 0.63 (95% CI 0.48-0.76), FDG-PET 0.70 (95% CI 0.59-0.79), FDG-PET/CT 0.80 (95% CI 0.69-0.89), WBC scintigraphy 0.88 (95% CI 0.81-1.94), and WBC scintigraphy SPECT/CT 0.82 (95% CI 0.57-0.96). Pre- and post-test results showed that WBC SPECT/CT favours FDG-PET/CT, with a positive post-test probability of 96% versus 83%. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests the diagnostic performance of WBC scintigraphy combined with SPECT/CT is the greatest in diagnosing VGI. However, it is a time consuming technique and not always available. Therefore FDG-PET/CT may be favourable as the initial imaging technique. The use of solitary CTA in diagnosing VGI seems to be obsolete.
BACKGROUND:Vascular graft infection (VGI), a serious complication in vascular surgery, has a high morbidity and mortality rate. The diagnosis is complicated by non-specific symptoms and challenged by the variable accuracy of different imaging techniques. The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of various imaging techniques to diagnose VGI. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Data sources included PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane from January 1997 until October 2017. Observational cohort studies were included. A meta-analysis was conducted on several imaging modalities: computed tomography with or without angiography (CT(A)), 18F-fluoro-d-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography with or without low dose or contrast enhanced CT (FDG-PET(/CT)), and white blood cell scintigraphy with or without single photon emission computed tomography combined with low dose CT (WBC (SPECT/CT)). RESULTS: Of 4259 papers, 14 articles were included, containing eight prospective and six retrospective articles. CTA (I2 7.4%), FDG-PET (I2 36.5%), and FDG-PET/CT (I2 36.6%) showed negligible to moderate heterogeneity, while WBC scintigraphy ± SPECT/CT (I2 78.6%) showed considerable heterogeneity. Pooled sensitivity for CTA was 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.75), in contrast to FDG-PET of 0.94 (95% CI 0.88-0.98), FDG-PET/CT of 0.95 (95% CI 0.87-0.99), WBC scintigraphy of 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.94), and WBC scintigraphy with SPECT/CT of 0.99 (95% CI 0.92-1.00). The pooled specificities were for CTA 0.63 (95% CI 0.48-0.76), FDG-PET 0.70 (95% CI 0.59-0.79), FDG-PET/CT 0.80 (95% CI 0.69-0.89), WBC scintigraphy 0.88 (95% CI 0.81-1.94), and WBC scintigraphy SPECT/CT 0.82 (95% CI 0.57-0.96). Pre- and post-test results showed that WBC SPECT/CT favours FDG-PET/CT, with a positive post-test probability of 96% versus 83%. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests the diagnostic performance of WBC scintigraphy combined with SPECT/CT is the greatest in diagnosing VGI. However, it is a time consuming technique and not always available. Therefore FDG-PET/CT may be favourable as the initial imaging technique. The use of solitary CTA in diagnosing VGI seems to be obsolete.
Authors: Enrico M Zardi; Nunzio Montelione; Vincenzo Catanese; Teresa Gabellini; Marco Caricato; Domenico M Zardi; Francesco Spinelli; Francesco Stilo Journal: Exp Ther Med Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 2.751
Authors: Rudolf A Werner; James T Thackeray; Johanna Diekmann; Desiree Weiberg; Johann Bauersachs; Frank M Bengel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-04-17 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: Chiara Lauri; Alberto Signore; Andor W J M Glaudemans; Giorgio Treglia; Olivier Gheysens; Riemer H J A Slart; Roberto Iezzi; Niek H J Prakken; Eike Sebastian Debus; Susanne Honig; Anne Lejay; Nabil Chakfé Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Ilona Polvoy; Robert R Flavell; Oren S Rosenberg; Michael A Ohliger; David M Wilson Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-08-06 Impact factor: 11.082