PDF icon Download PDF
Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · World J Nucl Med 2020; 19(04): 408-413
DOI: 10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_14_20
Case Report

Genuine impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with contrast-enhanced computed tomography in clinching the diagnosis and follow-up response assessment of vascular graft infections

Thangalakshmi Sivathapandi
Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Jaykanth Amalachandran
Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Indirani Elangovan
Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Shelley Simon
Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Asra Patel
Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET-CT, Apollo Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Nikita› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available ateRefMedOne
  Permissions and Reprints
Preview

Abstract

Vascular graft infection (VGI) is a rare and severe complication after vascular surgery associated with significant morbidity and mortality, but the diagnosis is not always straightforward due to its variable and nonspecific clinical signs. Computed tomography (CT) scan is considered to be the diagnostic tool of choice for advanced VGI, but there is a high incidence of false-negative results, especially in low-grade infections. 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with contrast-enhanced CT (18F-FDG PET-CT) imaging can serve as an effective alternative tool for assessment of suspected VGI and also provide accurate anatomic localization of the infective focus. Here, we describe three cases of VGI with various clinical presentations where the site of infection was diagnosed, confirmed, and documented with the help of 18F-FDG PET-CT imaging.

Keywords

Aortic root infection - fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with contrast-enhanced computed tomography - vascular graft infection

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.




Publication History

Received: 03 April 2020

Accepted: 01 May 2020

Article published online:
19 April 2022

© 2020. Sociedade Brasileira de Neurocirurgia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Saleem BR, Meerwaldt R, Tielliu IF, Verhoeven EL, van den Dungen JJ, Zeebregts CJ. Conservative treatment of vascular prosthetic graft infection is associated with high mortality. Am J Surg 2010;200:47-52.
  • 2 Legout L, D'Elia PV, Sarraz-Bournet B, Haulon S, Meybeck A, Senneville E, et al. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic vascular graft infections. Med Mal Infect 2012;42:102-9.
  • 3 Keidar Z, Nitecki S. FDG-PET in prosthetic graft infections. Semin Nucl Med 2013;43:396-402.
  • 4 Swain TW 3rd, Calligaro KD, Dougherty MD. Management of infected aortic prosthetic grafts. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2004;38:75-82.
  • 5 Valentine RJ. Diagnosis and management of aortic graft infection. Semin Vasc Surg 2001;14:292-301.
  • 6 Low RN, Wall SD, Jeffrey RB Jr, Sollitto RA, Reilly LM, Tierney LM Jr. Aortoenteric fistula and perigraft infection: Evaluation with CT. Radiology 1990;175:157-62.
  • 7 Orton DF, LeVeen RF, Saigh JA, Culp WC, Fidler JL, Lynch TJ, et al. Aortic prosthetic graft infections: Radiologic manifestations and implications for management. Radiographics 2000;20:977-93.
  • 8 Kumar R, Basu S, Torigian D, Anand V, Zhuang H, Alavi A. Role of modern imaging techniques for diagnosis of infection in the era of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Clin Microbiol Rev 2008;21:209-24.
  • 9 Mark A, Moss AA, Lusby R, Kaiser JA. CT evaluation of complications of abdominal aortic surgery. Radiology 1982;145:409-14.
  • 10 Fukuchi K, Ishida Y, Higashi M, Tsunekawa T, Ogino H, Minatoya K, et al. Detection of aortic graft infection by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: Comparison with computed tomographic findings. J Vasc Surg 2005;42:919-25.
  • 11 Macedo TA, Stanson AW, Oderich GS, Johnson CM, Panneton JM, Tie ML. Infected aortic aneurysms: Imaging findings. Radiology 2004;231:250-7.
  • 12 Sueyoshi E, Sakamoto I, Kawahara Y, Matsuoka Y, Hayashi K. Infected abdominal aortic aneurysm: Early CT findings. Abdom Imaging 1998;23:645-8.
  • 13 Keidar Z, Pirmisashvili N, Leiderman M, Nitecki S, Israel O. 18F-FDG uptake in noninfected prosthetic vascular grafts: Incidence, patterns, and changes over time. J Nucl Med 2014;55:392-5.
  • 14 Sah BR, Husmann L, Mayer D, Scherrer A, Rancic Z, Puippe G, et al. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in vascular graft infections. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2015;49:455-64.