Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective study evaluates diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for infections in LVAD patients, indicating high sensitivity but notable false positives.
Infection remains a major complication in patients receiving contemporary left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). This retrospective single-center study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ( 18 F-FDG PET/CT) for detecting different types of infections. Seventy-five scans from 40 HeartMate 3 patients performed before May 2024 were included and blindly assessed by an experienced nuclear medicine specialist. Both visual and semi-quantitative analyses of 18 F-FDG uptake were performed. Compared with the final clinical diagnosis established by a multidisciplinary team, the sensitivity of 18 F-FDG PET/CT for driveline and central device infections was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 81–99) and 81% (95% CI, 48–97), with corresponding specificities of 48% (95% CI, 29–67) and 37% (95% CI, 23–53), respectively. In semi-quantitative analyses, a cut-off maximum standardized uptake value (SUV max ) of 4.15 provided optimal accuracy for driveline infections (sensitivity 78%, specificity 80%), whereas a cut-off SUV ratio-liver of 1.29 yielded the best accuracy for central device infections (sensitivity 73%, specificity 69%). 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake was also noted at various device regions in patients without infection or with non-mechanical circulatory support-specific infections, with false-positive rates of 80% and 63%, respectively. 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT shows high sensitivity but considerable false positives and should be used as a complementary tool within a multidisciplinary framework for infection management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: