Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology

Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 1197e1218, 2006

doi:10.1016/j.berh.2006.08.009
available online at http://www.sciencedirect.com

10

Imaging of musculoskeletal infections

Christopher J. Palestro* MD
Professor of Nuclear Medicine and Radiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine,
Chief of Nuclear Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, 270-05 76th Avenue, New Hyde Park,
NY 11040, USA

Charito Love MD
Research Scientist
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York, USA

Theodore T. Miller MD
Associate Professor of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine,
Chief, Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging
Department of Radiology, North Shore University Hospital and Long Island Jewish Medical Center,
Manhassett, New York, USA

Imaging procedures are routinely used to evaluate patients suspected of having musculoskeletal
infection. Radiographs should be performed whenever musculoskeletal infection is suspected.
Even when not diagnostic, radiographs are useful. They provide an anatomic overview of the
region of interest, including pre-existing conditions that could influence the selection and
interpretation of subsequent procedures. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is sensitive,
provides superb anatomic detail, does not use ionizing radiation, and is rapidly completed.
This technique is especially valuable for septic arthritis, spinal osteomyelitis, and diabetic
foot infections. Among the radionuclide procedures, three-phase bone imaging is readily avail-
able, and very accurate in unviolated bone. Labeled leukocyte imaging should be used in cases
of ‘complicating osteomyelitis’ such as prosthetic joint infections. This test is also useful in
unsuspected diabetic pedal osteomyelitis and the neuropathic joint. Gallium imaging is a useful
adjunct to MIR in spinal infection. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 718 470 7081; Fax: þ1 718 831 1147.
E-mail address: palestro@lij.edu (C.J. Palestro).
1521-6942/$ - see front matter ª 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1198 C. J. Palestro et al

tomography (FDG-PET) will likely play an important role, especially in the evaluation of spinal
infection.

Key words: musculoskeletal infection; osteomyelitis; magnetic resonance imaging; ultrasono-

graphy; computed tomography; radiographs; bone scintigraphy; labeled leukocytes; gallium;
FDG-PET.

The diagnosis of musculoskeletal infection can be clinically challenging, and imaging

procedures are routinely performed as part of the diagnostic work-up. Although there
is a plethora of imaging tests from which to choose, no single test is optimal for every
situation, and each patient is best served with an individualized approach. This article
reviews the principles, indications, and limitations of the various morphologic and
functional imaging studies available for diagnosing musculoskeletal infection.

PROCEDURES

Morphologic imaging

Radiography
Relatively inexpensive and readily available, radiographs should routinely be the initial
imaging procedure performed in all patients suspected of having musculoskeletal infec-
tion. The earliest radiographic changes of osteomyelitis are soft-tissue swelling and
blurring of adjacent fat planes, which may take several days to become apparent after
the onset of infection. Approximately 10 days after the onset of infection, radiographs
may demonstrate lysis of medullary trabeculae, focal loss of cortex, and periosteal re-
action (Figure 1).1
The sensitivity of plain radiography ranges from 43% to 75%, and the specificity
from 75% to 83%. Though helpful when positive, a negative study does not exclude
osteomyelitis. In patients with violated bone, moreover, radiographs are non-specific,
being diagnostic in as few as 3e5% of culture-positive cases.2 Even when they are not
diagnostic, radiographs are useful. They provide an anatomic overview of the region of

Figure 1. Osteomyelitis of the fourth toe. Radiograph shows destruction of the cortical and trabecular
bone of the proximal phalanx (black arrow) and soft tissue swelling (white arrows).
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1199

interest and any pre-existing conditions that could potentially influence both the selec-
tion and interpretation of subsequent procedures.

Magnetic resonance imaging

Advantages of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the superb anatomic detail it re-
veals (including the ability to evaluate both bone and adjacent soft tissue), its lack of
ionizing radiation, and its rapid completion. Disadvantages of MRI are its occasional
inability to distinguish infectious from reactive inflammation, and difficulty imaging sites
with metallic instrumentation such as joint prostheses.
The earliest finding of acute osteomyelitis on MRI is an alteration of the normal
marrow signal intensity, which can be appreciated as early as 1e2 days after the onset
of infection. Due to inflammatory edema, which is the hallmark of acute infection, the
signal intensity of marrow decreases on T1-weighted sequences and increases on fat-
suppressed T2-weighted sequences, reflecting the free water content of the inflamma-
tory exudate. The margins of the abnormal signal are usually ill-defined. Periosteal
reaction and adjacent soft-tissue edema subsequently develop and are apparent on
MRI earlier than on radiographs (Figure 2). In routine uncomplicated situations there
is little need for contrast, since the signal abnormality is seen as well on a fat-
suppressed T2-weighted sequence as it is with a post-contrast T1-weighted sequence.
Intravenous gadolinium contrast is most useful for evaluating soft tissue abscesses and
for distinguishing synovial thickening from synovial fluid.3

Figure 2. Osteomyelitis of the proximal fibula. A coronal fat-suppressed T2-weighted magnetic resonance
image of the leg of a child shows high signal intensity in the proximal shaft of the fibula (F), with surrounding
high-signal-intensity soft-tissue edema and periosteal reaction (arrows). Note the normal low signal intensity
in the adjacent normal tibia (T).
1200 C. J. Palestro et al

MRI has a 100% negative predictive value for excluding osteomyelitis; if the marrow
is completely normal on all pulse sequences, infection can be reliably excluded. The
positive predictive value of MRI, or its ability to differentiate osteomyelitis from other
causes of abnormal marrow signal intensity (such as neuropathic arthropathy and
‘reactive marrow edema’), is not as high. Reactive marrow edema is non-infectious
edema that occurs in bone marrow adjacent to a site of soft-tissue infection or
even adjacent to another focus of osteomyelitis. The exact pathogenesis is unknown
but it is thought to represent a type of vasogenic hyperemia. The signal intensity of
reactive marrow edema can mimic that of osteomyelitis and it can be enhanced
with gadolinium contrast agents, thus causing false-positive results.4

Computed tomography and ultrasonography

Computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) are also used to evaluate acute
osteomyelitis, but are not mainstream imaging modalities. CT features of acute oste-
omyelitis are increased density of the normal fatty medullary canal as it is replaced by
infectious edema, blurring of fat planes, and eventually periosteal reaction and loss of
cortex.5,6 Although CT may show these changes earlier than plain radiographs, it is
less desirable than MRI because of decreased soft-tissue contrast as well as exposure
to ionizing radiation.
In many places in the world US is more readily available than MRI, and is the next
imaging modality employed after radiography. Sonographically, acute osteomyelitis is
characterized by the presence of a subperiosteal abscess.7 Advantages of US are
that it is rapidly performed, does not use ionizing radiation, and does not require
sedation of small children. US is useful in regions that are complicated by orthopedic
instrumentation and which therefore might not be well seen with MRI or CT, or in
patients in whom MRI is contraindicated.
Disadvantages of US are that it is operator-dependent and can have false-negatives
and false-positives. US cannot image past the cortex of a bone, and therefore early
osteomyelitis that has not yet produced a subperiosteal abscess may not be appreci-
ated. Power Doppler sonography will eventually show hyperemia around the perios-
teal abscess, but may not do so in the first few days of abscess formation.8
Conversely, a soft-tissue abscess that is adjacent to bone but is not truly subperiosteal
may be misinterpreted as osteomyelitis. Finally, complex anatomic regions such as the
wrist or foot can be difficult to evaluate with US.

Functional (radionuclide) imaging tests

Three-phase bone scintigraphy

Bone scintigraphy is performed with technetium-99m-labeled diphosphonates, usually
methylene diphosphonate (MDP). Tracer uptake is dependent on blood flow and the
rate of new bone formation. When used for suspected osteomyelitis, a three-phase
bone scan should be performed. The three-phase bone scan consists of the flow or
perfusion phase, which is acquired immediately after tracer injection, followed imme-
diately by an image of the region of interest, which is the blood pool or soft-tissue
phase. The third or bone phase consists of images performed 2e4 hours later. The
classic appearance of osteomyelitis on three-phase bone imaging is focal hyperper-
fusion, focal hyperemia, and focal bone uptake (Figure 3). Bone scintigraphy is widely
available, relatively inexpensive, easily performed, and rapidly completed. The test is
extremely sensitive and can be positive within 2 days after the onset of symptoms.
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1201

Figure 3. Osteomyelitis of the right calcaneus. Posterior images show focal hyperperfusion on the flow
phase (left), focal hyperemia on the blood pool phase (middle) and focal bony uptake on the bone phase
(right). This is the classic presentation of osteomyelitis on three-phase bone scintigraphy.

With an accuracy of more than 90%, three-phase bone scintigraphy is the nuclear med-
icine test of choice for diagnosing osteomyelitis in bones not affected by underlying
conditions.9e11 Abnormalities on bone scans reflect the rate of new bone formation
in general and not infection specifically. Consequently fractures, orthopedic hardware,
and the neuropathic joint can all result in a positive three-phase bone scan in the ab-
sence of infection, and in these circumstances, because of decreased specificity, the
bone scan is less useful.10,11

Gallium scintigraphy
Several factors govern uptake of this tracer in inflammation and infection. About 90%
of circulating gallium is in the plasma and nearly all of it is transferrin-bound. Increased
blood flow and increased vascular membrane permeability result in increased delivery
and accumulation of transferrin-bound gallium at inflammatory foci. Gallium also binds
to lactoferrin, which is present in high concentrations in most infections. Direct uptake
by certain bacteria has been observed in vitro. Siderophores, low-molecular-weight
chelates produced by bacteria, have a high affinity for gallium. The siderophoree
gallium complex is presumably transported into the bacterium, where it remains until
phagocytosed by macrophages. Some gallium may be transported bound to leukocytes.
Gallium imaging is usually performed 18e72 hours after injection and is often per-
formed in conjunction with radionuclide bone imaging. Although reliable when clearly
positive or negative, the study is frequently equivocal, and the overall accuracy of
bone/gallium imaging ranges between about 60% and 80% (Figure 4). The less-than-
ideal imaging characteristics of gallium and the need for two isotopes with multiple im-
aging sessions over several days are additional disadvantages of the procedure.12,13

In-vitro labeled leukocytes

The development of methods to radiolabel leukocytes that migrate to sites of infection
was a significant milestone in the evolution of radionuclide techniques for imaging infec-
tion. A variety of in-vitro leukocyte-labeling techniques have been used; the most com-
monly employed procedures make use of the lipophilic compounds indium-111
oxyquinolone and technetium-99m-HMPAO. The radiolabeling procedure takes about
2e3 hours. A total white count of at least 2000/mL is needed to obtain satisfactory im-
ages. The majority of leukocytes labeled are usually neutrophils, and the procedure is
therefore most useful for identifying neutrophil-mediated inflammatory processes
such as bacterial infections. The procedure is less useful for those illnesses in which
the predominant cellular response is other than neutrophilic, such as tuberculosis.14e17
Labeled leukocyte imaging is the radionuclide procedure of choice for diagnosing
so-called complicating osteomyelitis.11 Although they do not usually accumulate at
1202 C. J. Palestro et al

Figure 4. Equivocal bone/gallium study. The distribution and relative intensity of activity around the left total
knee replacement is nearly identical on the bone (left) and gallium (right) images. Although bone/gallium
imaging is reliable when clearly positive or negative, the large number of equivocal results (up to 30%) is
a significant limitation to this procedure.

sites of increased bone mineral turnover in the absence of infection, labeled leukocytes
do accumulate in the bone marrow. The normal distribution of hematopoietically ac-
tive bone marrow in adults is generally assumed to be confined to the axial and prox-
imal appendicular skeletons. In fact, the ‘normal’ distribution of hematopoietically
active bone marrow is variable. Systemic diseases such as sickle-cell and Gaucher dis-
ease produce generalized alterations in marrow distribution, while fractures, orthope-
dic hardware, and the neuropathic joint cause localized alterations. The normal
distribution of hematopoietically active marrow in children varies with age. Conse-
quently, it may not be possible to determine whether an area of activity on a labeled
leukocyte image represents infection or atypically located but otherwise normal mar-
row. As a result it is often necessary to perform technetium-99m sulfur colloid mar-
row imaging.18 Both labeled leukocytes and sulfur colloid accumulate in the bone
marrow; leukocytes also accumulate in infection, sulfur colloid, however, does not.19
The combined study is positive for infection when activity is present on the labeled
leukocyte image without corresponding activity on the sulfur colloid marrow image
(Figure 5).19 The overall accuracy of combined leukocyte/marrow imaging is approxi-
mately 90%.20e29

In-vivo labeled leukocyte imaging

There are significant limitations to the in-vitro labeled leukocyte procedure. It is labor-
intensive, not always available, and involves direct handling of blood products. Consid-
erable effort has therefore been devoted to the search for in-vivo methods of labeling
leukocytes, including peptides and antigranulocyte antibodies.30
BW 250/183 (Granuloscint CISBio International, Gif sur Yvette, France) is a mu-
rine monoclonal IgG1 immunoglobulin that binds to the NCA-95 antigen present on
leukocytes. About 10% of the injected activity is neutrophil-bound at 45 minutes post
injection, with 20% of the activity circulating freely in the blood. Studies performed
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1203

Figure 5. (A) Infected right hip prosthesis. The labeled leukocyte image (left) is unremarkable. However,
when reviewed together with the marrow image (right), the abnormal leukocyte activity in the right hip re-
gion (arrow) is easily appreciated. (B) Left femoral fracture with orthopedic hardware. Radiograph (left)
demonstrates orthopedic hardware in the left femur. On the labeled leukocyte image (middle) there is irreg-
ularly increased uptake in the distal left femur and proximal left tibia, which could be due to infection. The
distribution of activity on the corresponding marrow image (right) is virtually identical to that on the labeled
leukocyte image. This indicates that the findings on the labeled leukocyte image are due to marrow, not to
infection.

with this agent generally become positive by 6 hours after injection; however delayed
imaging at 24 hours has been recommended to increase lesion detection. Sensitivity
for osteomyelitis ranges from 69% in the hips to 100% for in the lower leg and ankle,
probabyly reflecting easier detection with decreasing marrow distally.31 A significant
disadvantage of this agent is the high incidence of dose-dependent human antimurine
antibody (HAMA) response, which ranges from less than 5% in patients receiving a sin-
gle dose of the antibody to more than 30% in patients receiving repeated injections.30
While clinical reactions may occur, the most important effect of HAMA is that it can
invalidate results of repeat imaging by altering the pharmacokinetics of the agent, re-
sulting in both false-positive and false-negative tests. This agent is not available in the
United States.
Sulesomab (Leukoscan Immunomedics, Morris Plains, New Jersey, USA) is a
50-kD fragment antigen-binding (Fab’) portion of a murine monoclonal antibody of the
IgG1 class that binds to the NCA-90 antigen on leukocytes.32 An advantage of this an-
tibody fragment is the lack of HAMA response. The mechanism of uptake, in addition
to binding to circulating neutrophils, includes crossing permeable capillary membranes
and binding of the fragment to leukocytes already present at the site of infection.33
Clinical results have been variable. In one investigation of patients with suspected
musculoskeletal infection, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the test were
1204 C. J. Palestro et al

90e93%, 85e89%, and 88e90% respectively.34,35 In another series, however, the sen-
sitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 76%, 84%, and 78% respectively.36 In one series
of diabetic patients with suspected pedal osteomyelitis, the agent was reported to be
100% sensitive and 100% specific.35 Another group of investigators, however, reported
an 80% sensitivity and a 67% specificity in this population.36 This agent is not available
in the United States.
99m
Tc-fanolesomab (NeutroSpec, Palatin Technologies, Cranberry, New Jersey,
USA) is a murine M-class immunoglobulin that binds to the CD15 antigen expressed
on human neutrophils, eosinophils and lymphocytes. The antibody binds to neutrophils
in greater proportion than to any other cell type. Binding increases proportionately
with increasing numbers of circulating neutrophils, and is up-regulated with neutrophil
activation. Fanolesomab binds to circulating neutrophils, which eventually migrate to
the focus of infection, as well as to neutrophils and neutrophil debris containing
CD-15 receptors already sequestered in the focus of infection.37
In clinical trials this agent accurately diagnosed osteomyelitis in the appendicular
skeleton.38,39 A phase-II study was undertaken to assess the accuracy of fanolesomab
for diagnosing osteomyelitis and to compare it with labeled leukocyte imaging and
three-phase bone scintigraphy.38 Bone scintigraphy was sensitive (100%) but not spe-
cific (38%). Fanolesomab was sensitive (91%), moderately specific (69%), and compa-
rable to labeled leukocytes (91% sensitivity, 62% specificity).
In another investigation, 25 diabetic patients with pedal ulcers underwent fanoleso-
mab, labeled leukocyte, and three-phase bone imaging. The sensitivity, specificity, and
accuracy of fanolesomab alone were 90%, 67%, and 76%, respectively, comparable to
the values obtained with labeled leukocyte imaging alone (80%, 67%, and 72%) and sig-
nificantly more specific than three-phase bone imaging.39
99m
Tc-fanolesomab was approved for clinical use in the United States in 2004. In
December 2005 it was withdrawn from the United States market as a result of
post-marketing reports of serious and life-threatening cardiopulmonary events follow-
ing administration. Onset of these events generally occurred within minutes after
injection and included two deaths attributed to cardiopulmonary failure within 30
minutes after injection. Additional cases of serious cardiopulmonary events e includ-
ing cardiac arrest, hypoxia, dyspnea and hypotension e required resuscitation with
fluids, vasopressors, and oxygen. The precise explanation for these events has not
yet been elucidated. Currently 99mTc-fanolesomab is not available anywhere and its
future is uncertain.

FDG-PET
Fluorine-18- fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) is transported into cells via glucose trans-
porters, and is phosphorylated to 18F-2’-FDG 6-phosphate but is not metabolized.
The degree of cellular uptake of FDG is related to the cellular metabolic rate and
to the number of glucose transporters.40e42 Activated inflammatory cells e such as
neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, and macrophages e demonstrate increased ex-
pression of glucose transporters, and in inflammatory conditions the affinity of glucose
transporters for deoxyglucose presumably is increased by various cytokines and
growth factors.41,43e45
FDG-PET has several potential advantages over conventional nuclear medicine
tests. Results are available within 30e60 minutes of tracer administration. Normal
bone marrow has only a low glucose metabolism under physiological conditions, which
may facilitate the distinction of inflammatory cellular infiltrates from hematopoietic
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1205

marrow. Degenerative bone changes usually show only faintly increased FDG uptake
compared to infection. FDG-PET images are not affected by metallic implant artifacts
and have a distinctly higher spatial resolution than images obtained with single photon
emitting tracers. Finally, FDG is less expensive than the combinations of radiolabeled
leukocyte/bone marrow/bone scan multimodality imaging techniques.46,47
There have been several studies confirming the utility of FDG for diagnosing mus-
culoskeletal infection.48e53 In a retrospective study of patients with a history of frac-
tures or orthopedic intervention, FDG-PET results were compared with the results of
bone scans, radiographs, CT and MRI, as well as surgical pathology.52 In patients with
fractures or surgery within 3 months prior to FDG-PET, only 6/14 patients had abnor-
mally increased FDG uptake. In the group of patients with fractures or surgery more
than 3 months prior to FDG-PET, only one showed abnormally increased uptake; this
patient had biopsy-proven osteomyelitis at the fracture site. In a subgroup of nine
patients with recent spinal compression fractures or spinal surgery, all scans were neg-
ative, even in the three patients in whom the interval between the fracture and FDG-
PET imaging was brief. In another series, none of four patients with fractures 4e12
months old had false-positive results.50 In another study, reactive changes in aseptic
fracture non-union showed only faint uptake that could be clearly distinguished
from osteomyelitis.48
These initial reports about the value of FDG imaging for diagnosing osteomyelitis
are encouraging; nevertheless extensive investigations focused on specific indications
are still needed to accurately define the role of this tracer in musculoskeletal infection.

Radiolabeled antibiotics
Antibiotics localize in foci of infection, and may be taken up and metabolized by micro-
organisms. A novel approach to diagnosing infection makes use of radiolabeled anti-
biotics, which have none of the disadvantages of the in-vitro-labeled white cell or
antigranulocyte antibody procedures. Presumably, the radiolabeled antibiotic would
be incorporated and metabolized by the bacteria present in the infectious focus, re-
sulting in accurate and specific localization of the infection. The most extensively stud-
ied of these compounds is technetium-99m-ciprofloxacin (Infecton, DraxImage,
Kirkland, Quebec Canada). Published results have been variable, however.54e57 At
the present time, this agent is available only on an investigational basis.

INDICATIONS

Spinal osteomyelitis

Spinal, or vertebral, osteomyelitis, which accounts for less than 10% of all cases of
osteomyelitis and has a predilection for the elderly, may result from bacteremia or direct
inoculation of bacteria into the spine. Though usually confined to the vertebral body
and intervertebral disc, the posterior elements are involved in up to 20% of cases.58
MRI, with an accuracy of approximately 90%, is the imaging procedure of choice for
diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis.59 MRI permits early diagnosis of infection and provides
direct visualization of the spinal cord, subarachnoid space, extradural soft tissues, and
spinal column. MRI is more sensitive than radiographs and CT for early detection of
vertebral infection. The initial MRI appearance of spinal osteomyelitis is that of marrow
edema in adjacent vertebrae and endplates. Typically, there is also high signal intensity
within the disc on T2WI images and loss of the intranuclear cleft. Eventually the
1206 C. J. Palestro et al

vertebral endplates are destroyed (Figure 6). Both pyogenic and tuberculous spondy-
litis can have associated paravertebral and epidural abscesses, and gadolinium contrast
should be administered to help distinguish abscess from non-drainable phlegmon. Un-
like pyogenic abscesses, tuberculous abscesses may calcify, and the calcification is best
appreciated on radiographs or CT.
MRI is not without limitations. Severe degenerative disc disease, with edema-like
granulation changes in the endplates and in the superior and inferior aspects of the
disc, can mimic infection. However, if the patient has been complaining of pain for sev-
eral weeks to months and the MRI shows no evidence of endplate destruction or para-
vertebral or epidural abscess, the process is more likely to be non-infected
degeneration than pyogenic. CT is useful for evaluating the endplates in equivocal
cases to determine whether there is frank destruction. CT also is helpful for guiding
percutaneous biopsy.
MRI is sensitive to motion, and patients who are unable to remain still for the ex-
amination may not be suitable candidates for imaging. The test is contraindicated in
patients with certain implants, such as pacemakers and cardiac valves. In patients in
whom MRI cannot be performed or is not diagnostic, nuclear medicine studies are
a useful alternative. The current radionuclide procedure of choice for diagnosing spinal
osteomyelitis is combined bone/gallium imaging, with results comparable to those of
MRI. In addition to enhancing the specificity of the bone scan, gallium is useful for
detecting the abscesses that often accompany this entity.11,58,60,61 There are data to
suggest that if gallium tomography, or single photon emission CT (SPECT), is used
the bone scan is not needed (Figure 7).58
FDG-PET is a promising alternative to bone and gallium imaging for diagnosing spi-
nal osteomyelitis (Figure 8). Although most published series are small, FDG-PET ap-
pears to be as accurate as gallium imaging for diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis. It may
be especially useful for distinguishing true infectious spondylodiscitis from severe gran-
ulation-type degenerative disc disease, a differentiation that is not always easily made
with MRI.62 One group of investigators reported that FDG-PETwas superior to MRI in

Figure 6. Vertebral osteomyelitis. Sagittal T1-weighted MRI (left) shows low-signal-intensity marrow edema
(white arrows) in the endplates on either side of the disc and focal destruction of the endplates (black
arrows). Sagittal fat-suppressed T2-weighted MRI (right) shows high-signal-intensity marrow edema (white
arrows) in the endplates on either side of the disc and focal destruction of the endplates (black arrows).
Note also the high-signal-intensity edema within the disc itself.
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1207

Figure 7. Vertebral osteomyelitis. Initial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, not shown) was not diagnostic
and gallium imaging (left) was performed. Intense uptake is present in the lower lumbar spine (arrow).
Repeat MRI with contrast (right) shows enhancement of the L3/L4 vertebrae and the prevertebral and
epidural tissues. Gallium is a useful adjunct to MRI in suspected spinal osteomyelitis.

patients who had a history of surgery and suffered from high-grade infection in com-
bination with paravertebral abscess formation and in those with low-grade spondylitis
or discitis.63
In 57 patients, including 27 with metallic hardware, suspected of having spinal infec-
tion after spinal surgery, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG-PET were
100%, 81%, and 86%, respectively. The positive predictive value was 65%, and the neg-
ative predictive value was 100%. Among 30 patients without spinal implants, there

Figure 8. Coronal 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) image, from

the same patient as shown in Figure 7, demonstrates intensely increased activity in the lower lumbar spine
(arrow), similar to the abnormality present on the gallium image. The intense activity to the left of the spine
is due to FDG accumulation in the left kidney (arrowhead). FDG-PET is a useful adjunct to MRI in suspected
spinal osteomyelitis. Same-day imaging and superior image resolution are advantages of this technique com-
pared to gallium.
1208 C. J. Palestro et al

were two false-positive scans; both occurred in patients who had undergone surgery
within 6 months prior to imaging. Among 27 patients with spinal implants, there were
six false-positive results; these were not related to recent surgery. Sensitivity, specific-
ity and accuracy were not significantly different between the subgroup that had sur-
gery within 6 months of the FDG-PET and the subgroup with surgery more than 6
months prior to FDG-PET. The specificity was 65% in the group with spinal implants
and 92% in the group without. The overall accuracy (86%) of FDG-PET in this prospec-
tive study was good, and the negative predictive value (100%) was excellent. The
authors concluded that postoperative spinal infection can be excluded when the
FDG-PET study is negative.64
In contrast to other sites in the skeleton, labeled leukocyte imaging is not useful for
diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis. Although increased uptake is virtually diagnostic, 50%
or more of all cases of vertebral osteomyelitis present as areas of decreased or absent
activity (photopenia) on white cell images. This photopenia is not specific for vertebral
osteomyelitis, and is associated with numerous other conditions, including tumor,
infarction and Paget’s disease.65

Diabetic foot infections

Diabetes mellitus affects about 5% of the US population.31 The most common compli-
cation in the diabetic forefoot is the mal perforans ulcer, accounting for more than
90% of all cases of diabetic pedal osteomyelitis. Many patients with pedal osteomyelitis
present without systemic illness and lack obvious clinical signs and symptoms other
than the ulcer, and imaging studies are often used to confirm the diagnosis.66
Radiographs should be the initial imaging study performed because they may pro-
vide the diagnosis and because they give an overview of the anatomy and any under-
lying complicating structural changes. Previous radiographs are helpful in order to
determine whether any of the abnormalities seen on the current radiographs are
acute, suggesting infection. In many cases, however, more advanced imaging is needed,
and either labeled leukocyte imaging or MRI can be performed (Figure 9). A meta-
analysis of the literature with determination of weighted averages for each modality
showed that radiographs had a weighted average sensitivity of 54% and 80% specificity,

Figure 9. Diabetic pedal osteomyelitis. Sagittal T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (left) shows
destruction of the midfoot with a low-signal-intensity abscess (open arrow) and low-signal-intensity marrow
edema (closed arrows). Sagittal fat-suppressed T2-weighted image (right) shows the high-signal-intensity
abscess (open arrow) and high-signal-intensity marrow edema (closed arrows).
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1209

three-phase bone scan had an average of 91% sensitivity and 46% specificity, labeled
white cell studies had 88% sensitivity and 82% specificity, and MRI had 92% sensitivity
and 84% specificity.67
Approximately 5% of diabetics with neuropathy develop a neuropathic or Charcot
joint, usually involving the tarsal or tarsometatarsal joints. The most common radio-
graphic finding is a Lisfranc fracture-dislocation with eburnation and fragmentation
of the tarsometarsal joints. Ultimately, massive bony sclerosis, osteophytosis, frank de-
struction of bones and joints, and osseous debris occur. It can be difficult to distinguish
the destruction of neuro-arthropathy from that of superimposed infection, although
foci of lysis within a sclerotic bone suggest infection.66
On MRI, the neuropathic joint is characterized by disorganized destruction, dislo-
cation, marrow edema, effusion, and loss of bone and joint definition, and it is not
always possible to distinguish the edema of the neuropathy from that of osteomyelitis.
Secondary signs such as adjacent abscess, ulcer, or sinus tract, and cortical destruction
suggest that the marrow edema is infectious.68e71
The dramatic bony changes of the Charcot joint invariably result in a positive three-
phase bone scan even in the absence of infection.66 Labeled leukocyte accumulation in
the uninfected neuropathic joint does occur, but this problem can be overcome by per-
forming radionuclide marrow imaging (Figure 10).72
Despite the myriad of available procedures, diagnosing complications of the diabetic
foot is challenging. For pedal osteomyelitis the most useful studies are MRI and labeled
leukocyte scintigraphy. Besides availability and experience, the information desired will
govern the choice of imaging study to be performed. MRI has the obvious advantages
of providing excellent anatomic detail and resolution of both bones and soft tissues,
which is necessary for surgical planning. Labeled leukocyte imaging may be more sen-
sitive for detecting clinically unsuspected pedal osteomyelitis and is useful for monitor-
ing response to medical therapy and evaluating the neuropathic joint.66,72e74
There are too few data available at present to assess the role of FDG-PET in dia-
betic foot infections.75

Prosthetic joint infection

Nearly 500,000 hip and knee arthroplasties are performed annually in the United
States, and it is estimated that by the year 2030 this number may exceed 700,000.
Some complications of joint replacement surgery, such as dislocation and fracture,

Figure 10. Charcot (neuropathic) joint. Radiograph (left) demonstrates increased bone density in the tarsal
bones and metatarsal bone bases, as well as Lisfranc deformity and soft tissue swelling. Superimposed infec-
tion cannot be excluded. Labeled leukocyte image (middle) demonstrates increased activity in the neuro-
pathic joint. The marrow image (right) is similar in appearance to the labeled leukocyte image, and the
combined study is negative for infection.
1210 C. J. Palestro et al

are readily diagnosed and treated. Differentiating infection from aseptic loosening is
more difficult, however, because the clinical presentation of e and the histopathologic
changes in e both entities are remarkably similar.76
A significant number of cases of aseptic loosening are due to an inflammatory/
immune reaction against the prosthesis itself. A synovial-like pseudomembranous
structure develops at the cement/bone interface. The cellular composition of the
pseudomembrane is varied: histiocytes are seen most frequently (95% of specimens),
followed by giant cells (80%), and lymphocytes and plasma cells (25%). Neutrophils are
present in less than 10% of the cases. Particulate debris, produced by component wear
and fragmentation, presumably attracts and activates tissue phagocytes present around
the prosthesis. This debris is impervious to regular enzymatic destruction, leading to
repeated but unsuccessful attempts at phagocytosis. These ongoing attempts at phago-
cytosis stimulate secretion of proinflammatory cytokines and proteolytic enzymes that
damage bone and cartilage and activate immune cells. The heightened inflammatory
response leads to osteolysis, resulting in loss of supporting osseous tissues and, even-
tually, prosthetic loosening.76
The rate of infection following primary implantation is about 1% for hip and 2% for
knee prostheses. The rate of infection following revision surgery is somewhat higher:
about 3% for hip and 5% for knee replacements. About one third of these infections
develop within 3 months, another third within 1 year, and the remainder more than 1
year after surgery. Histopathologically, the inflammatory reaction accompanying the in-
fected prosthesis is similar to that present in aseptic loosening, with one important
difference: neutrophils, usually absent in aseptic loosening, are invariably present in
infection.76e78
Differentiating aseptic loosening from infection is extremely important because the
treatment of these two entities is different. The patient with an aseptically loosened
device usually undergoes a single-stage revision arthroplasty requiring only one hospi-
tal admission. The treatment of the infected prosthesis is more complicated, requiring
a two-stage procedure; the infected prosthesis is removed, the patient receives
a course of antimicrobial therapy, and eventually undergoes a revision arthroplasty.76
The useful diagnostic test must be sensitive and specific. A test that is sensitive but
not specific leads to multiple expensive operations in patients in whom a single inter-
vention may have sufficed. The specific, but insensitive, test also results in additional
surgical intervention, because undiagnosed infection will cause any revision implant
to fail. Non-specific markers of inflammation e such as the erythrocyte sedimentation
rate and C-reactive protein level e may be elevated in both loosening and infection.76
Joint aspiration with gram stain and culture is considered the definitive diagnostic test;
its sensitivity, however, is variable, ranging from 28% to 92%. Its specificity is more con-
sistent, ranging from 92% to 100%.79e81 Plain radiographs are neither sensitive nor
specific, and cross-sectional imaging modalities such as CT and MRI are limited by
hardware-induced artifacts.76
Radionuclide imaging, which reflects physiologic rather than anatomic changes and
is not affected by metallic hardware, plays an important role in the evaluation of pros-
thetic joint infection. Bone scintigraphy is very sensitive but not at all specific, and it
should be used only as a screening test. The current imaging procedure of choice
for evaluating suspected joint replacement infection is combined leukocyte/marrow
imaging with an overall accuracy in the range 88e98%.20,21,23,28,29 Although inflamma-
tion may be present in both the infected and aseptically loosened device, neutrophils,
which are invariably present in infection, are usually absent in aseptic loosening. The
success of labeled leukocyte imaging is highly dependent on the presence of
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1211

a neutrophil response, and this critical histological difference between infection and
aseptic loosening accounts for the high sensitivity and specificity of leukocyte/marrow
imaging for diagnosing prosthetic joint infection (Figure 5A).29
The role of FDG-PET in the evaluation of painful lower-extremity joint prostheses
has been extensively investigated.29,82e87 Although initial reports suggested that FDG-
PET could accurately identify the infected joint prosthesis, recent studies are less en-
couraging. FDG-PET is not capable of distinguishing the aseptically loosened from the
infected prosthesis.29,87 This is not surprising when one considers that inflammation e
often intense e is present in both aseptic loosening and infection. In contrast to
labeled leukocyte imaging, there is no preferential imaging of neutrophil-mediated
inflammatory processes with FDG-PET. Thus, both aseptic loosening and infection
are characterized by increased periprosthetic activity on FDG studies.

Septic arthritis

Infectious organisms can reach the joint either through direct inoculation, hematoge-
nous spread, or contiguous spread from an adjacent intra-articular site of osteomye-
litis. Radiographically, the earliest signs of septic arthritis are soft-tissue swelling and
blurring of fat planes about the joint, followed by joint distention due to effusion
and synovial thickening. Periarticular osteopenia also eventually develops, and early
in the course of pyogenic arthritis, joint space narrowing occurs due to proteolytic
enzymes released by the white-cell exudate which destroy the articular cartilage. In
tuberculous arthritis, the main radiographic features are marked periarticular osteope-
nia with relative preservation of the joint space until late in the disease, because the
chronic inflammatory exudate of tuberculosis lacks the cartilage-destroying proteo-
lytic enzymes.
US and MRI are excellent for the evaluation of the suspected septic joint, and will
show changes before radiography. The presence of a joint effusion does not neces-
sarily indicate a septic joint. This is particularly true for children, in whom a systemic
viral infection can cause a transient but painful reactive sterile synovitis. In large joints
such as the hip and knee, absence of a joint effusion or synovial thickening excludes
a septic joint with a high degree of certainty. This is not the case, however, for small
joints.88,89
US is especially useful in children since it can be performed quickly and does not
require sedation. US demonstrates a joint effusion as an anechoic or a mildly hetero-
geneous hypoechoic fluid collection. Depending on the acuteness of the process,
power Doppler may or may not show hyperemia in the surrounding synovium
(Figure 11).90,91 A disadvantage of US is that it cannot evaluate the underlying bony
structures, and therefore may miss an early osteomyelitis.
MRI is useful for evaluating both the joint and the underlying bony structures. Dis-
tinguishing joint fluid from thickened synovium is best done using intravenous gadoli-
nium contrast. Although there is overlap, pyogenic synovitis tends to be thick and
irregular, while tuberculous synovitis tends to be thin and smooth.
Radionuclide studies are of limited value in the evaluation of septic arthritis. The
classic presentation of acute arthritis on three-phase bone scintigraphy consists of hy-
perperfusion and hyperemia of the joint on early images, with increased activity limited
to the articular surfaces of the involved bones on delayed images. This presentation is
associated with both septic and aseptic arthritis. Osteomyelitis and acute arthritis are
not mutually exclusive, and bone-scan findings consistent with septic arthritis do not
1212 C. J. Palestro et al

Figure 11. Septic arthritis of the hip. Longitudinal power Doppler sonogram of a child’s hip (left) shows
the anechoic effusion (E) and the bright hyperemia of the distended joint capsule and surface of the cortex
(arrows). Femoral head (FH) is normal. Longitudinal power Doppler sonogram of the contralateral,
asymptomatic, hip (right) shows no effusion, minimal background hyperemia and a normal femoral head (FH).

exclude e and can potentially mask e an underlying osteomyelitis.1 Neither gallium

nor labeled leukocyte imaging reliably separates infectious from non-infectious arthri-
tis. Labeled leukocyte imaging can be positive in rheumatoid arthritis, acute gouty
arthritis, and pseudogout (Figure 12).92e95

SUMMARY

A wide range of imaging modalities is available for the evaluation of clinically suspected
musculoskeletal infection. Relatively inexpensive and ubiquitously available,

Figure 12. Rheumatoid arthritis of the wrist. There is diffusely increased labeled leukocyte activity in the
right wrist (arrow) of a patient with rheumatoid arthritis. This uptake pattern is indistinguishable from
that seen in septic arthritis.
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1213

radiographs should be the initial imaging procedure performed in all patients suspected
of having musculoskeletal infection. Even when not diagnostic, radiographs are valuable
because they provide an anatomic overview of the region of interest and any pre-ex-
isting conditions that could potentially influence both the selection and interpretation
of subsequent procedures. If additional imaging studies, beyond radiographs, are
necessary, their selection should be governed by the indication and availability.
Magnetic resonance imaging is exquisitely sensitive, provides superb anatomic detail,
does not use ionizing radiation, and is rapidly completed. This technique is especially
valuable for septic arthritis, spinal osteomyelitis, and diabetic foot infections. It is less
useful in the evaluation of orthopedic hardware because hardware-induced artifacts
degrade image quality. Among the various radionuclide procedures, three-phase
bone imaging accurately diagnoses infection in unviolated bone. Labeled leukocyte
imaging is the radionuclide procedure of choice in cases of ‘complicating osteomyeli-
tis’, and is the imaging procedure of choice for prosthetic joint infection. Unlike MRI or
CT, this procedure is not hindered by the presence of metallic hardware. Labeled
leukocyte imaging is also useful in unsuspected diabetic pedal osteomyelitis, for mon-
itoring response to treatment in these patients, and for evaluating the neuropathic
joint. Gallium imaging is a useful adjunct to MRI in spinal infection. Although data
are just emerging, FDG-PET likely will play an important role, especially in spinal
infections.

Practice points

 radiographs should be the initial imaging procedure performed in the work-up

of musculoskeletal infection
 MRI provides exquisite anatomic detail, is extremely sensitive, does not use
ionizing radiation, and is especially useful for diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis,
diabetic pedal osteomyelitis, and septic arthritis
 three-phase bone scintigraphy is readily available, easily performed, very sensi-
tive, and accurately diagnoses osteomyelitis in unviolated bone; in the presence
of trauma, orthopedic hardware, neuropathic joint, etc, it is useful only as
a screening test
 labeled leukocyte imaging is the radionuclide procedure of choice for diagnos-
ing complicating osteomyelitis. To maximize accuracy, complementary marrow
imaging must often be performed. This test is especially useful for diagnosing
prosthetic joint infection, unsuspected pedal osteomyelitis in diabetics, and
for evaluating the neuropathic joint
 labeled leukocyte imaging is not useful for diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis
 gallium imaging is a useful adjunct to MRI in spinal osteomyelitis
 FDG-PET appears to be a promising alternative to gallium imaging for spinal
osteomyelitis, but is not useful for prosthetic joint infection
 ultrasound is useful in suspected septic arthritis
 radionuclide studies are of limited value in septic arthritis
1214 C. J. Palestro et al

Research agenda

 both MRI and labeled leukocyte imaging are used for evaluating diabetic foot
infections, but intra-individual comparisons between these two tests are lack-
ing; a prospective comparison in the same population would help establish the
appropriate indications for each of them
 a prospective investigation of FDG-PET and gallium in suspected spinal osteo-
myelitis should be performed to confirm the value of FDG-PET in this entity
 while the diagnostic value of the imaging tests reviewed in this paper have been
investigated, few data are available on their value for monitoring response to
treatment

REFERENCES

1. Palestro CJ. Musculoskeletal infection. In Freeman LM (ed.) Nuclear Medicine Annual. 1994. Philadelphia:
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1994, pp. 91e119.
*2. Boutin RD, Brossmann J, Sartoris DJ et al. Update on imaging of orthopedic infections. Orthopedic Clinics
of North America 1998; 29: 41e66.
*3. Miller TT, Randolph Jr. DA, Staron RB et al. Fat-suppressed MRI of musculoskeletal infection: fast T2
weighted techniques versus gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images. Skeletal Radiology 1997; 26:
654e658.
4. Craig JG, Amin MB, Wu K et al. Osteomyelitis of the diabetic foot: MR imaging-pathologic correlation.
Radiology 1997; 203: 849e855.
5. Gold RH, Hawkins RA & Katz RD. Bacterial osteomyelitis: findings on plain radiography, CT, MR, and
scintigraphy. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology 1991; 157: 365e370.
6. Chandnani VP, Beltran J, Morris CS et al. Acute experimental osteomyelitis and abscesses: detection
with MR imaging versus CT. Radiology 1990; 174: 233e236.
7. Riebel TW, Nasir R & Nazarenko O. The value of sonography in the detection of osteomyelitis. Pediatric
Radiology 1996; 26: 291e297.
8. Chao HC, Lin SJ, Huang YC et al. Color Doppler ultrasonographic evaluation of osteomyelitis in
children. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 1999; 18: 729e734.
9. Maurer AH, Chen DCP & Camargo EE. Utility of three-phase skeletal scintigraphy in suspected osteo-
myelitis: Concise communication. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1981: 941e949.
10. Schauwecker DS. The scintigraphic diagnosis of osteomyelitis. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
1992; 158: 9e18.
*11. Palestro CJ & Torres MA. Radionuclide imaging in orthopedic infections. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
1997; 27: 334e345.
12. Hoffer P. Gallium: mechanisms. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1980; 21: 282e285.
13. Palestro CJ. The current role of gallium imaging in infection. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine 1994; 24:
128e141.
14. Love C & Palestro CJ. Radionuclide imaging of infection. Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology 2004; 32:
47e57.
15. Fineman D, Palestro CJ, Kim CK et al. Detection of abnormalities in febrile AIDS patients with In-111-
labeled leukocyte and Ga-67 scintigraphy. Radiology 1989; 170: 677e680.
16. Palestro CJ, Swyer AJ, Kim CK et al. Tuberculous lymphadenitis: In-111 leukocyte and Ga-67 imaging.
Clinical Nuclear Medicine 1991; 16: 857e858.
17. Palestro CJ, Schultz BL, Horowitz M et al. Indium-111 leukocyte and gallium-67 imaging in acute
sarcoidosis: Report of two patients. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1992; 33: 2027e2029.
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1215

*18. Palestro CJ, Love C, Tronco GG et al. Combined labeled leukocyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid
marrow imaging for diagnosing musculoskeletal infection: principles, technique, interpretation, indica-
tions and limitations. RadioGraphics 2006; 26: 859e870.
19. Feigin DS, Strauss HW & James HW. The bone marrow scan in experimental osteomyelitis. Skeletal
Radiology 1976; 1: 103e108.
20. Mulamba L’AH, Ferrant A, Leners N et al. Indium-111 leucocyte scanning in the evaluation of painful hip
arthroplasty. Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica 1983; 54: 695e697.
*21. Palestro CJ, Kim CK, Swyer AJ et al. Total-hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic indium-111-labeled leuko-
cyte activity and complementary technetium-99m-sulfur colloid imaging in suspected infection. Journal
of Nuclear Medicine 1990; 31: 1950e1955.
22. King AD, Peters AM, Stuttle AW et al. Imaging of bone infection with labelled white blood cells: role of
contemporaneous bone marrow imaging. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1990; 17: 148e151.
23. Palestro CJ, Swyer AJ, Kim CK et al. Infected knee prosthesis: diagnosis with In-111 leukocyte, Tc-99m
sulfur colloid, and Tc-99m MDP imaging. Radiology 1991; 179: 645e648.
*24. Seabold JE, Nepola JV, Marsh JL et al. Postoperative bone marrow alterations: potential pitfalls in the
diagnosis of osteomyelitis with In-111-labeled leukocyte scintigraphy. Radiology 1991; 180: 741e747.
25. Palestro CJ, Roumanas P, Swyer AJ et al. Diagnosis of musculoskeletal infection using combined In-111
labeled leukocyte and Tc-99m SC marrow imaging. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 1992; 17: 269e273.
26. Achong DM & Oates E. The computer-generated bone marrow subtraction image: a valuable adjunct to
combined In-111 WBC/Tc-99m in sulfur colloid scintigraphy for musculoskeletal infection. Clinical
Nuclear Medicine 1994; 19: 188e193.
27. Palestro CJ, Mehta HH, Patel M et al. Marrow versus infection in the Charcot joint: Indium-111 leuko-
cyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid scintigraphy. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 1998; 39: 346e350.
28. Joseph TN, Mujitaba M, Chen AL et al. Efficacy of combined technetium-99m sulfur colloid/indium-111
leukocyte scans to detect infected total hip and knee arthroplasties. The Journal of Arthroplasty 2001; 16:
753e758.
29. Love C, Marwin SE, Tomas MB et al. Diagnosing infection in the failed joint replacement: A comparison
of coincidence detection fluorine-18 FDG and indium-111-labeled leukocyte/technetium-99m-sulfur
colloid marrow imaging. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2004; 45: 1864e1871.
30. Love C & Palestro CJ. 99mTc-fanolesomab. Idrugs 2003; 6: 1079e1085.
31. Weiner RE & Thakur ML. Imaging infection/inflammations. The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine
1999; 43: 2e8.
32. Becker W, Blair J, Behr T et al. Detection of soft tissue infections and osteomyelitis using a technetium-
99m-labeled anti-granulocyte monoclonal antibody fragment. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1994; 35:
1436e1443.
33. Becker W. The contribution of nuclear medicine to the patient with infection. European Journal of Nu-
clear Medicine 1995; 22: 1195e1211.
34. Becker W, Palestro CJ, Winship J et al. Rapid diagnosis of infections with a monoclonal antibody
fragment (Leukoscan). Clinical Orthopaedics 1996; 329: 263e272.
35. Hakki S, Harwood SJ, Morrissey MA et al. Comparative study of monoclonal antibody scan in diagnos-
ing orthopaedic infection. Clinical Orthopaedics 1997; 335: 275e285.
36. Deveillers A, Garin E, Polard JL et al. Comparison of Tc-99m-labelled antileukocyte fragment Fab’ and
Tc-99m-HMPAO leukocyte scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone and joint infections: a prospective
study. Nuclear Medicine Communications 2000; 21: 747e753.
37. Thakur ML, Marcus CS, Henneman P et al. Imaging inflammatory diseases with neutrophil-specific
technetium-99m-labeled monoclonal antibody anti-SSEA-1. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1996; 37:
1789e1795.
38. Palestro CJ, Kipper SL, Weiland FL et al. Osteomyelitis: Diagnosis with 99mTc-labeled antigranulocyte
antibodies compared with diagnosis with indium-111-labeled leukocytes- initial experience. Radiology
2002; 223: 758e764.
39. Palestro CJ, Caprioli R, Love C et al. Rapid diagnosis of pedal osteomyelitis in diabetics with a
technetium-99m-labeled monoclonal antigranulocyte antibody. The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery
2003; 42: 2e8.
40. Bell GI, Burant CF, Takeda J et al. Structure and function of mammalian facilitative sugar transporters.
The Journal of Biological Chemistry 1993; 268: 19161e19164.
1216 C. J. Palestro et al

41. Pauwels EKJ, Ribeiro MJ, Stoot JHMB et al. FDG accumulation and tumor biology. Nuclear Medicine and
Biology 1998; 25: 317e322.
42. Zhuang H & Alavi A. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic imaging in the detection
and monitoring of infection and inflammation. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine 2002; 32: 47e59.
43. Mochizuki T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y et al. FDG uptake and glucose transporter subtype expressions in
experimental tumor and inflammation models. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2001; 42: 1551e1555.
44. Kubota R, Yamada S, Kubota K et al. Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in
vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. Jour-
nal of Nuclear Medicine 1992; 33: 1972e1980.
45. Paik JY, Lee KH, Choe YS et al. Augmented 18F-FDG uptake in activated monocytes occurs during the
priming process and involves tyrosine kinases and protein kinase C. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2004;
45: 124e128.
46. Love C, Tomas MB, Tronco GG et al. Imaging infection and inflammation with 18F-FDG-PET. Radio-
Graphics 2005; 25: 1357e1368.
*47. Gemmel F, Dumarey N, Palestro CJ et al. Radionuclide imaging of spinal infections. European Journal of
Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2006; 33: 1226e1237.
48. Guhlmann A, Brecht-Krauss D, Suger G et al. Chronic osteomyelitis: detection with FDG PET and cor-
relation with histopathologic findings. Radiology 1998; 206: 749e754.
49. Sugawara Y, Braun DK, Kison PV et al. Rapid detection of human infections with fluorine-18 fluorode-
oxyglucose and positron emission tomography: preliminary results. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine
1998; 25: 1238e1243.
50. De Winter F, Van de Wiele C, Vogelaers D et al. Flourine e18 flourodeoxyglucose-positron emission
tomography: a highly accurate imaging modality for the diagnosis of chronic musculoskeletal infections.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2001; 83-A: 651e660.
51. Kälicke T, Schmitz A, Risse JH et al. Flourine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET in infectious bone diseases:
results of histologically confirmed cases. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2000; 27: 524e528.
52. Zhuang HM, Sam JW, Chacko TK et al. Rapid normalization of osseous FDG uptake following trau-
matic or surgical fractures. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2003; 30:
1096e1103.
53. Schiesser M, Stumpe KDM, Trentz O et al. Detection of metallic implant-associated infections with
FDG PET in patients with trauma: Correlation with microbiologic results. Radiology 2003; 226:
391e398.
54. Sonmezoglu K, Sonmezoglu M, Halac M et al. Usefulness of 99mTc-ciprofloxacin (Infecton) scan in
diagnosis of chronic orthopedic infections: Comparative study with 99mTc-HMPAO leukocyte
scintigraphy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2001; 42: 567e574.
55. de Winter F, Gemmel F, Van Laere K et al. 99mTc-ciprofloxacin planar and tomographic imaging for the
diagnosis of infection in the postoperative spine: experience in 48 patients. European Journal of Nuclear
Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2004; 31: 233e239.
56. Gemmel F, de Winter F, Van Laere K et al. 99mTc ciprofloxacin imaging for the diagnosis of infection in
the postoperative spine. Nuclear Medicine Communications 2004; 25: 277e283.
57. Sarda L, Saleh-Mghir A, Peker C et al. Evaluation of (99m)Tc-ciprofloxacin scintigraphy in a rabbit model
of Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infection. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2002; 43: 239e245.
58. Love C, Patel M, Lonner BS et al. Diagnosing spinal osteomyelitis: A comparison of bone and gallium
scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 2000; 25: 963e977.
59. Modic MT, Feiglin DH, Piraino DW et al. Vertebral osteomyelitis: assessment using MR. Radiology 1985;
157: 157e166.
60. Lisbona R, Derbekyan V, Novales-Diaz J et al. Gallium-67 scintigraphy in tuberculous and nontubercu-
lous infectious spondylitis. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1993; 34: 853e859.
61. Hadjipavlou AG, Cesani-Vazquez F, Villaneuva-Meyer J et al. The effectiveness of gallium citrate Ga 67
radionuclide imaging in vertebral osteomyelitis revisited. The American Journal of Orthopedics 1998; 27:
179e183.
62. Stumpe KD, Zanetti M, Weishaupt D et al. FDG positron emission tomography for differentiation of
degenerative and infectious endplate abnormalities in the lumbar spine detected on MR imaging. AJR.
American Journal of Roentgenology 2002; 179: 1151e1157.
 Imaging of musculoskeletal infections 1217

63. Gratz S, Dorner J, Fischer U et al. 18F-FDG hybrid PET in patients with suspected spondylitis. European
Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2002; 29: 516e524.
64. de Winter F, Gemmel F, Van de Wiele C et al. 18-fluorine fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission to-
mography for the diagnosis of infection in the postoperative spine. Spine 2003; 28: 1314e1319.
65. Palestro CJ, Kim CK, Swyer AJ et al. Radionuclide diagnosis of vertebral osteomyelitis: indium-111-
leukocyte and technetium-99m-methylene diphosphonate bone scintigraphy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine
1991; 32: 1861e1865.
*66. Palestro CJ & Tomas MB. Scintigraphic evaluation of the diabetic foot. In Freeman LM (ed.) Nuclear
Medicine Annual. 2000. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000, pp. 143e172.
67. Wrobel JS & Connolly JE. Making the diagnosis of osteomyelitis. The role of prevalence. Journal of the
American Podiatric Medical Association 1998; 88: 337e343.
68. Lederman HP, Morrison WB & Schweitzer ME. MR image of analysis of pedal osteomyelitis: distribution,
patterns of spread, and frequency of associated ulceration and septic arthritis. Radiology 2002; 223:
747e755.
*69. Lederman HP, Morrison WB & Schweitzer ME. Pedal abscesses in patients suspected of having pedal
osteomyelitis: analysis with MR imaging. Radiology 2002; 224: 649e655.
70. Morrison WB, Schweitzer ME, Batte WG et al. Osteomyelitis of the foot: relative importance of pri-
mary and secondary MR imaging signs. Radiology 1998; 207: 625e632.
71. Ahmadi ME, Morrison WB, Carrino JA et al. Neuropathic arthropathy of the foot with and without
superimposed osteomyelitis: MR imaging characteristics. Radiology 2006; 238: 622e631.
72. Palestro CJ, Mehta HH, Patel M et al. Marrow versus infection in the Charcot joint: indium-111 leuko-
cyte and technetium-99m sulfur colloid scintigraphy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1998; 39: 346e350.
73. Newman LG, Waller J, Palestro CJ et al. Leukocyte scanning with 111In is superior to magnetic reso-
nance imaging in the diagnosis of clinically unsuspected osteomyelitis in diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes
Care 1992; 15: 1527e1530.
74. Newman LG, Waller J, Palestro CJ et al. Unsuspected osteomyelitis in diabetic foot ulcers: diagnosis
and monitoring by leukocyte scanning with indium In 111 oxyquinoline. JAMA 1991; 266: 1246e1251.
75. Keidar Z, Militianu D, Melamed E et al. The diabetic foot: initial experience with 18F-FDG PET/CT.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2005; 46: 444e449.
*76. Love C, Tomas MB, Marwin SE et al. Role of nuclear medicine in diagnosis of the infected joint replace-
ment. RadioGraphics 2001; 21: 1229e1238.
77. Della Valle CJ, Bogner E, Desai P et al. Analysis of frozen sections of intraoperative specimens obtained
at the time of reoperation after hip or knee resection arthroplasty for the treatment of infection.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 1999; 81-A: 684e689.
78. Tsukayama DT, Estrada R & Gustilo RB. Infection after total hip arthroplasty. The Journal of Bone and
Joint Surgery 1996; 78-A: 512e523.
79. Fehring TK & Cohen B. Aspiration as a guide to sepsis in revision total hip arthroplasty. The Journal of
Arthroplasty 1996; 11: 543e547.
80. Lachiewicz PF, Rogers GD & Thomason HC. Aspiration of the hip joint before revision total hip arthro-
plasty. Clinical and laboratory factors influencing attainment of a positive culture. The Journal of Bone and
Joint Surgery. American Volume 1996; 78: 749e754.
81. Cheung A, Lachiewicz PF & Renner JB. The role of aspiration and contrast-enhanced arthrography
in evaluating the uncemented hip arthroplasty. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology 1997; 168:
1305e1309.
82. Zhuang H, Duarte PS, Pourdehnad M et al. The promising role of 18F-FDG PET in detecting infected
lower limb prosthesis implants. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2001; 42: 44e48.
83. Chacko TK, Zhuang H, Stevenson K et al. The importance of the location of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake
in periprosthetic infection in painful hip prostheses. Nuclear Medicine Communications 2002; 23:
851e855.
84. Manthey N, Reinhard P, Moog F et al. The use of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomog-
raphy to differentiate between synovitis, loosening and infection of hip and knee prostheses. Nuclear
Medicine Communications 2002; 23: 645e653.
85. Van Acker F, Nuyts J, Maes A et al. FDG-PET, 99mTc-HMPAO white blood cell SPET and bone scintig-
raphy in the evaluation of painful total knee arthroplasties. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2001;
28: 1496e1504.
1218 C. J. Palestro et al

86. Vanquickenborne B, Maes A, Nuyts J et al. The value of 18FDG-PET for the detection of infected hip
prosthesis. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2003; 30: 705e715.
87. Stumpe KDM, Notzli H, Zanetti M et al. FDG-PET in the differentiation of infection and aseptic loos-
ening in patients with total hip replacements: comparison with conventional radiographs and three-
phase bone scintigraphy. Radiology 2004; 231: 333e341.
88. Zawin JK, Hoffer FA, Rand FF et al. Joint Effusion in Children with an Irritable Hip: US Diagnosis and
Aspiration. Radiology 1993; 187: 459e463.
89. Karchevsky M, Schweitzer ME, Morrison WB et al. MRI findings of septic arthritis and associated os-
teomyelitis in adults. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology 2004; 182: 119e122.
90. Strouse PJ, DiPietro MA, Teo EL et al. Power Doppler evaluation of joint effusions: investigation in a rab-
bit model. Pediatric Radiology 1999; 29: 617e623.
91. Strouse PJ, DiPietro MA & Adler RS. Pediatric hip effusions: evaluation with power Doppler sonogra-
phy. Radiology 1998; 206: 731e735.
92. Coleman RE, Samuelson CO & Bain S. Imaging with Tc-99m MDP and Ga-67 citrate in patients with
rheumatoid arthritis and septic arthritis. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1982; 23: 479e482.
93. Uno K, Matsui N, Nohira K et al. Indium-111 leukocyte imaging in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1986; 27: 339e344.
94. Palestro CJ, Vega A, Kim CK et al. Appearance of acute gouty arthritis on indium-111 Labeled leukocyte
scintigraphy. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1990; 31: 682e687.
95. Palestro CJ & Goldsmith SJ. In-111 labeled leukocyte imaging in a case of pseudogout. Clinical Nuclear
Medicine 1992; 17: 366e367.