No abstract

No abstract

The presence of a cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) can be burdened by complications such as late infections that are associated with significant morbidity and mortality and require immediate and effective treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) in patients with suspected CIED infection. Fifteen patients who performed a 18F-FDG PET/CT for suspicion of CIED infection were retrospectively analyzed; 15 patients, with CIED, that underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT for oncological reasons, were also evaluated. Visual qualitative analysis and semi-quantitative analysis were performed. All patients underwent standard clinical management regardless 18F-FDG PET/CT results. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) resulted as 90.91%, 75%, 86.67%, 90.91% and 75% respectively. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) and semi-quantitative ratio (SQR) were collected and showed differences statistically significant between CIED infected patients and those who were not. Exploratory cut-off values were derived from receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for SUVmax (2.56) and SQR (4.15). This study suggests the clinical usefulness of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with CIED infection due to its high sensitivity, repeatability and non-invasiveness. It can help the clinicians in decision making, especially in patients with doubtful clinical presentation. Future large-scale and multicentric studies should be conducted to establish precise protocols about 18F-FDG PET/CT performance.

Purpose To assess the presence and pattern of incidental interstitial lung alterations suspicious of COVID-19 on fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) ([18F]FDG PET/CT) in asymptomatic oncological patients during the period of active COVID-19 in a country with high prevalence of the virus. Methods This is a multi-center retrospective observational study involving 59 Italian centers. We retrospectively reviewed the prevalence of interstitial pneumonia detected during the COVID period (between March 16 and 27, 2020) and compared to a pre-COVID period (January–February 2020) and a control time (in 2019). The diagnosis of interstitial pneumonia was done considering lung alterations of CT of PET. Results Overall, [18F]FDG PET/CT was performed on 4008 patients in the COVID period, 19,267 in the pre-COVID period, and 5513 in the control period. The rate of interstitial pneumonia suspicious for COVID-19 was significantly higher during the COVID period (7.1%) compared with that found in the pre-COVID (5.35%) and control periods (5.15%) (p < 0.001). Instead, no significant difference among pre-COVID and control periods was present. The prevalence of interstitial pneumonia detected at PET/CT was directly associated with geographic virus diffusion, with the higher rate in Northern Italy. Among 284 interstitial pneumonia detected during COVID period, 169 (59%) were FDG-avid (average SUVmax of 4.1). Conclusions A significant increase of interstitial pneumonia incidentally detected with [18F]FDG PET/CT has been demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. A majority of interstitial pneumonia were FDG-avid. Our results underlined the importance of paying attention to incidental CT findings of pneumonia detected at PET/CT, and these reports might help to recognize early COVID-19 cases guiding the subsequent management.

We investigated the prognostic value of interim 18F-FDG PET/CT (PET-2) in pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (pHL), evaluating both visual and semiquantitative analysis.Thirty pHL patients (age ≤16) underwent serial 18F-FDG PET/CT: at baseline (PET-0), after 2 cycles of chemotherapy (PET-2) and at the end of first-line chemotherapy (PET-T). PET response assessment was carried out visually according to the Deauville Score (DS), as well as semiquantitatively by using the semiquantitative parameters reduction from PET-0 to PET-2 (ΔΣSUVmax0–2, ΔΣSUVmean0–2). Final clinical response assessment (outcome) at the end of first-line chemotherapy was the criterion standard, considering patients as responders (R) or nonresponders (NR). Disease status was followed identifying patients with absence or relapsed/progression disease (mean follow-up: 24 months, range 3–78).Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of visual and semiquantitative assessment were calculated; furthermore, Fisher exact test was performed to evaluate the association between both visual and semiquantitative assessment and outcome at the end of the first-line chemotherapy. The prognostic capability of PET-2 semiquantitative parameters was calculated by ROC analysis and expressed as area under curve (AUC). Finally, progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed according to PET-2 results based on the 5-point scale and semiquantitative criteria, using the Kaplan–Meier method.Based on the outcome at the end of first-line chemotherapy, 5 of 30 patients were NR, the remnant 25 of 30 were R. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of visual analysis were 60%,72%,30%,90%,70%; conversely, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of semiquantitative assessment were 80%, 92%, 66.7%, 95.8%, 90%. The highest AUC resulted for ΔΣSUVmax0–2 (0.836; cut-off <12.5; sensitivity 80%; specificity 91%). The association between ΔΣSUVmax0–2 and outcome at the end of first-line chemotherapy resulted to have a strong statistical significance (P = 0.0026). Both methods demonstrated to influence PFS, even if the semiquantitative assessment allowed a more accurate identification of patients with a high risk of treatment failure (P = 0.005).Our preliminary results showed that PET-2 visual assessment, by using Deauville criteria, can be improved by using the semiquantitative analysis. The SUV max reduction (ΔΣSUVmax0–2) evaluation might provide a support for the interpretation of intermediate scores, predicting with good confidence those patients who will have a poor outcome and require alternative therapies.