Normal imaging findings after ascending aorta prosthesis implantation on 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography with computed tomography

18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake patterns in positron emission tomography/computed tomography caused by inflammation and/or infection after graft surgery for thoracic aortic dissection

BACKGROUND

To identify 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake patterns in positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) caused by infection, inflammation, surgical material, and/or graft coating.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Of 610 consecutive patients with thoracic aortic graft surgery, 60 patients with 187 PET/CT were retrospectively included. We quantified FDG uptake in all grafts using maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) alone and in relation to liver background (SUVratio) and determined the uptake pattern. Mixed linear regression models with random slope and intercept were applied for the analysis of SUVratio over time and generalized estimating equations to analyze the associations with anastomosis uptake. FDG uptake was frequently focal (90%), higher in infected than in noninfected grafts (mean SUVratio 2.19; 95% CI 2.05-2.32 vs. 1.63; 1.46-1.79, P < 0.001), and decreasing slowly over time (SUVratio per year since surgery -0.048; 95% CI -0.15- 0.051, P = 0.34), without a difference in slope between infected and noninfected grafts (P = 0.52). There was no evidence of an interaction between SUVratio and use of BioGlue® surgical adhesive (intercept P = 0.73, slope P = 0.71), or graft coating (gelatin and collagen, all P > 0.7). FDG uptake at the anastomosis was more frequent in noninfected grafts than in infected grafts (66% vs. 21%, odds ratio (OR) 11.34; 95% CI 3.61-35.66, P < 0.001). This effect was attenuated by the use of BioGlue® (OR 5.05; 95% CI 0.45-56.9, P = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

FDG uptake in PET/CT after thoracic aortic graft surgery is higher in infected grafts than in noninfected grafts. In noninfected grafts, focal uptake is also frequent, mostly anastomosis-associated, not associated with graft coating, and possibly affected by the use of BioGlue®.

Alternative Nuclear Imaging Tools for Infection Imaging

Purpose of Review

Cardiovascular infections are serious disease associated with high morbidity and mortality. Their diagnosis is challenging, requiring a proper management for a prompt recognition of the clinical manifestations, and a multidisciplinary approach involving cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, infectious diseases specialist, imagers, and microbiologists. Imaging plays a central role in the diagnostic workout, including molecular imaging techniques. In this setting, two different strategies might be used to image infections: the first is based on the use of agents targeting the microorganism responsible for the infection. Alternatively, we can target the components of the pathophysiological changes of the inflammatory process and/or the host response to the infectious pathogen can be considered. Understanding the strength and limitations of each strategy is crucial to select the most appropriate imaging tool.

Recent Findings

Currently, multislice computed tomography (MSCT) and nuclear imaging (¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and leucocyte scintigraphy) are part of the diagnostic strategies. The main role of nuclear medicine imaging (PET/CT and SPECT/CT) is the confirmation of valve/CIED involvement and/or associated perivalvular infection and the detection of distant septic embolism. Proper patients’ preparation, imaging acquisition, and reconstruction as well as imaging reading are crucial to maximize the diagnostic information.

Summary

In this manuscript, we described the use of molecular imaging techniques, in particular WBC imaging, in patients with infective endocarditis, cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections, and infections of composite aortic graft, underlying the strength and limitations of such approached as compared to the other imaging modalities.