Download PDF
Der Nuklearmediziner 2006; 29(4): 265-271
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-942268
Skelettszintigraphie - Update 2006

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Indikationen und Wertigkeit der Skelettszintigraphie im Vergleich zur Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT)

Indications and Value of Bone Scintigraphy in Comparison to Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)A. Haug1 , M. Hacker1 , M. Weiss1 , K. Hahn1 , T. Pfluger1
  • 1Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
30 November 2006 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Mit zunehmender Verbreitung der radiologischen Schnittbilddiagnostik (CT/MRT) und der nuklearmedizinischen PET und PET/CT stellt sich die Frage nach den verbleibenden Indikationen für die klassische Skelettszintigraphie. Insbesondere die kürzlich eingeführte Ganzkörper-MRT stellt eine attraktive Alternative zur Skelettszintigraphie dar, da sie in der Lage ist, auch isolierte Knochenmarksherde und extraossäre Läsionen zu detektieren. Im Rahmen dieser Übersicht werden indikationsbezogen die Stärken und Limitationen von MRT und Skelettszintigraphie vorgestellt und diskutiert. Ferner wird auf den komplementären Einsatz beider Modalitäten bei speziellen Fragestellungen hingewiesen.

Abstract

With increasing use of cross-sectional imaging (CT/MRI) in radiology as well as PET and PET/CT in nuclear medicine, remaining indications for bone scintigraphy are in question. Recently introduced whole-body MRI represents an attractive alternative to bone scintigraphy, as MRI is additionally able to assess lesions that are limited to bone marrow and are located extraosseously. In this overview, indication-related strengths and limitations of MRI and bone scintigraphy are presented and discussed. Furthermore, complementary use of both modalities for special clinical questions is demonstrated.

Schlüsselwörter

Skelettszintigraphie - MRT - Indikationen

Key words

bone scintigraphy - MRI - indications

Literatur

  • 1 Walker R, Kessar P, Blanchard R, Dimasi M, Harper K, DeCarvalho V, Yucel E K, Patriquin L, Eustace S. Turbo STIR magnetic resonance imaging as a whole-body screening tool for metastases in patients with breast carcinoma: preliminary clinical experience.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;  11 343-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ladd S C, Zenge M, Antoch G, Forsting M. [Whole-body MR diagnostic concepts].  Rofo. 2006;  178 763-770
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kellenberger C J, Epelman M, Miller S F, Babyn P S. Fast STIR whole-body MR imaging in children.  Radiographics. 2004;  24 1317-1330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Pfluger T, Schmied C, Porn U, Leinsinger G, Vollmar C, Dresel S, Schmid I, Hahn K. Integrated imaging using MRI and 123I metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy to improve sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of pediatric neuroblastoma.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;  181 1115-1124
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Endo K, Oriuchi N, Higuchi T, Iida Y, Hanaoka H, Miyakubo M, Ishikita T, Koyama K. PET and PET/CT using (18)F-FDG in the diagnosis and management of cancer patients.  Int J Clin Oncol. 2006;  11 286-296
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bloem J L, Taminiau A H, Eulderink F, Hermans J, Pauwels E K. Radiologic staging of primary bone sarcoma: MR imaging, scintigraphy, angiography, and CT correlated with pathologic examination.  Radiology. 1988;  169 805-810
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ongolo-Zogo P, Thiesse P, Sau J, Desuzinges C, Blay J Y, Bonmartin A, Bochu M, Philip T. Assessment of osteosarcoma response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: comparative usefulness of dynamic gadolinium-enhanced spin-echo magnetic resonance imaging and technetium-99m skeletal angioscintigraphy.  Eur Radiol. 1999;  9 907-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schuetze S M. Utility of positron emission tomography in sarcomas.  Curr Opin Oncol. 2006;  18 369-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Durie B G. The role of anatomic and functional staging in myeloma: Description of Durie/Salmon plus staging system.  Eur J Cancer. 2006;  42 1539-1543
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Defilippi C, Chiappetta D, Marzari D, Mussa A, Lala R. Image diagnosis in McCune-Albright syndrome.  J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2006;  19 (Suppl 2) 561-570
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Woertler K. Benign bone tumors and tumor-like lesions: value of cross-sectional imaging.  Eur Radiol. 2003;  13 1820-1835
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tse W L, Hung L K, Law B, Ho P C. Enhanced localization of osteoid osteoma with radiolabeling and intraoperative gamma counter guidance: a case report.  J Hand Surg [Am]. 2003;  28 699-703
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I. The Detection of Bone Metastases in Patients with High-Risk Prostate Cancer: 99mTc-MDP Planar Bone Scintigraphy, Single- and Multi-Field-of-View SPECT, 18F-Fluoride PET, and 18F-Fluoride PET/CT.  J Nucl Med. 2006;  47 287-297
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Algra P R, Bloem J L, Tissing H, Falke T H, Arndt J W, Verboom L J. Detection of vertebral metastases: comparison between MR imaging and bone scintigraphy.  Radiographics. 1991;  11 219-232
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Frat A, Agildere M, Gencoglu A, Cakir B, Akin O, Akcali Z, Aktas A. Value of whole-body turbo short tau inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging with panoramic table for detecting bone metastases: comparison with 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate scintigraphy.  J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;  30 151-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Engelhard K, Hollenbach H P, Wohlfart K, Imhoff E von, Fellner F A. Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer.  Eur Radiol. 2004;  14 99-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Tausig A, Manthey N, Berger F, Sommer H, Pfluger T, Hahn K. [Advantages and limitations of whole-body bone marrow MRI using Turbo-STIR sequences in comparison to planar bone scans].  Nuklearmedizin. 2000;  39 174-179
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ghanem N, Altehoefer C, Kelly T, Lohrmann C, Winterer J, Schafer O, Bley T A, Moser E, Langer M. Whole-body MRI in comparison to skeletal scintigraphy in detection of skeletal metastases in patients with solid tumors.  In Vivo. 2006;  20 173-182
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ghanem N, Uhl M, Brink I, Schafer O, Kelly T, Moser E, Langer M. Diagnostic value of MRI in comparison to scintigraphy, PET, MS-CT and PET/CT for the detection of metastases of bone.  Eur J Radiol. 2005;  55 41-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 El-Maghraby T A, Moustafa H M, Pauwels E K. Nuclear medicine methods for evaluation of skeletal infection among other diagnostic modalities.  Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;  50 167-192
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Termaat M F, Raijmakers P G, Scholten H J, Bakker F C, Patka P, Haarman H J. The accuracy of diagnostic imaging for the assessment of chronic osteomyelitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 2005;  87 2464-2471
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Groves A M, Cheow H K, Balan K K, Bearcroft P W, Dixon A K. 16 detector multislice CT versus skeletal scintigraphy in the diagnosis of wrist fractures: value of quantification of 99Tcm-MDP uptake.  Br J Radiol. 2005;  78 791-795
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Groves A M, Cheow H K, Balan K K, Housden B A, Bearcroft P W, Dixon A K. 16-Detector multislice CT in the detection of stress fractures: a comparison with skeletal scintigraphy.  Clin Radiol. 2005;  60 1100-1105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Howard J L, Barron B J, Smith G G. Bone scintigraphy in the evaluation of extraskeletal injuries from child abuse.  Radiographics. 1990;  10 67-81
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Temmerman O P, Raijmakers P G, Berkhof J, David E F, Pijpers R, Molenaar M A, Hoekstra O S, Teule G J, Heyligers I C. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability of plain radiography, subtraction arthrography, nuclear arthrography, and bone scintigraphy in the assessment of aseptic femoral component loosening.  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2006;  126 316-323
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mumme T, Reinartz P, Alfer J, Muller-Rath R, Buell U, Wirtz D C. Diagnostic values of positron emission tomography versus triple-phase bone scan in hip arthroplasty loosening.  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2005;  125 322-329
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Shearman J, Esdaile J, Hawkins D, Rosenthall L. Predictive value of radionuclide joint scintigrams.  Arthritis Rheum. 1982;  25 83-86
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hanly J G, Barnes D C, Mitchell M J, MacMillan L, Docherty P. Single photon emission computed tomography in the diagnosis of inflammatory spondyloarthropathies.  J Rheumatol. 1993;  20 2062-2068
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Backhaus M, Burmester G R, Sandrock D, Loreck D, Hess D, Scholz A, Blind S, Hamm B, Bollow M. Prospective two year follow up study comparing novel and conventional imaging procedures in patients with arthritic finger joints.  Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;  61 895-904
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Huh Y M, Suh J S, Jeong E K, Lee S K, Lee J S, Choi B W, Kim D K. Role of the inflamed synovial volume of the wrist in defining remission of rheumatoid arthritis with gadolinium-enhanced 3D-SPGR MR imaging.  J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;  10 202-208
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kellner H, Schmidt W, Rau R. [Imaging procedures in rheumatology. Differential diagnosis using various imaging procedures in rheumatoid arthritis (RA)].  Z Rheumatol. 2005;  64 553-556
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Priv.-Doz. Dr. med. T. Pfluger

Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin · Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Ziemssenstraße 1

80336 München

Phone: +49/89/51 60 24 23

Fax: +49/89/51 60 45 55

Email: Thomas.Pfluger@med.uni-muenchen.de

      >