Diagnosis of peripheral bone and prosthetic joint infections: overview on the consensus documents by the EANM, EBJIS, and ESR (with ESCMID endorsement)

OBJECTIVES

Peripheral bone infection (PBI) and prosthetic joint infection (PJI) are two different infectious conditions of the musculoskeletal system. They have in common to be quite challenging to be diagnosed and no clear diagnostic flowchart has been established. Thus, a conjoined initiative on these two topics has been initiated by the European Society of Radiology (ESR), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID). The purpose of this work is to provide an overview on the two consensus documents on PBI and PJI that originated by the conjoined work of the ESR, EANM, and EBJIS (with ESCMID endorsement).

METHODS AND RESULTS

After literature search, a list of 18 statements for PBI and 25 statements for PJI were drafted in consensus on the most debated diagnostic challenges on these two topics, with emphasis on imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, white blood cell scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging have individually demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance over other imaging modalities for the diagnosis of PBI and PJI. However, the choice of which advanced diagnostic modality to use first depends on several factors, such as the benefit for the patient, local experience of imaging specialists, costs, and availability. Since robust, comparative studies among most tests do not exist, the proposed flowcharts are based not only on existing literature but also on the opinion of multiple experts involved on these topics.

KEY POINTS

• For peripheral bone infection and prosthetic joint infection, white blood cell and magnetic resonance imaging have individually demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance over other imaging modalities. • Two evidence- and expert-based diagnostic flowcharts involving variable combination of laboratory tests, biopsy methods, and radiological and nuclear medicine imaging modalities are proposed by a multi-society expert panel. • Clinical application of these flowcharts depends on several factors, such as the benefit for the patient, local experience, costs, and availability.

Correction to: Consensus document for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections: a joint paper by the EANM, EBJIS, and ESR (with ESCMID endorsement)

The authors regret to inform the readers that one of the author's name in the original publication of this article was spelled incorrectly as Victor Casar-Pullicino. The correct spelling is Victor N. Cassar-Pullicino and is now presented correctly in this article.

Direct comparison of conventional radiography and cone-beam CT in small bone and joint trauma

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic value of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and conventional radiography (CR) after acute small bone or joint trauma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March 2013 and January 2014, 231 patients with recent small bone or joint trauma underwent CR and subsequent CBCT. CR and CBCT examinations were independently assessed by two readers, blinded to the result of the other modality. The total number of fractures as well as the number of complex fractures were compared, and inter- and intraobserver agreement for CBCT was calculated. In addition, radiation doses and evaluation times for both modalities were noted and statistically compared.

RESULTS

Fracture detection on CBCT increased by 35% and 37% for reader 1 and reader 2, respectively, and identification of complex fractures increased by 236% and 185%. Interobserver agreement for CBCT was almost perfect, as was intraobserver agreement for reader 1. The intraobserver agreement for reader 2 was substantial. Radiation doses and evaluation time were significantly higher for CBCT.

CONCLUSION

CBCT detects significantly more small bone and joint fractures, in particular complex fractures, than CR. In the majority of cases, the clinical implication of the additionally detected fractures is limited, but in some patients (e.g., fracture-dislocations), the management is significantly influenced by these findings. As the radiation dose for CBCT substantially exceeds that of CR, we suggest adhering to CR as the first-line examination after small bone and joint trauma and keeping CBCT for patients with clinical-radiographic discordance or suspected complex fractures in need of further (preoperative) assessment.