Search

Purpose: This study is to develop a structured approach to distinguishing large-artery vasculitis from atherosclerosis using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography combined with low-dose computed tomography (FDG PET/CT)., Methods: FDG PET/CT images of 60 patients were evaluated, 30 having biopsy-proven giant cell arteritis (GCA; the most common form of large-artery vasculitis), and 30 with severe atherosclerosis. Images were evaluated by 12 nuclear medicine physicians using 5 criteria: FDG uptake pattern (intensity, distribution, circularity), the degree of calcification, and co-localization of calcifications with FDG-uptake. Criteria that passed agreement, and reliability tests were subsequently analysed for accuracy using receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses. Criteria that showed discriminative ability were then combined in a multi-component scoring system. Both initial and final 'gestalt' conclusion were also reported by observers before and after detailed examination of the images., Results: Agreement and reliability analyses disqualified 3 of the 5 criteria, leaving only FDG uptake intensity compared to liver uptake and arterial wall calcification for potential use in a scoring system. ROC analysis showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.90 (95%CI 0.87-0.92) for FDG uptake intensity. Degree of calcification showed poor discriminative ability on its own (AUC of 0.62; 95%CI 0.58-0.66). When combining presence of calcification with FDG uptake intensity into a 6-tiered scoring system, the AUC remained similar at 0.91 (95%CI 0.88-0.93). After exclusion of cases with arterial prostheses, the AUC increased to 0.93 (95%CI 0.91-0.95). The accuracy of the 'gestalt' conclusion was initially 89% (95%CI 86-91%) and increased to 93% (95%CI 91-95%) after detailed image examination., Conclusion: Standardised assessment of arterial wall FDG uptake intensity, preferably combined with assessment of arterial calcifications into a scoring method, enables accurate, but not perfect, distinction between large artery vasculitis and atherosclerosis., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

A systematic literature search was performed to summarise current knowledge on extracranial giant cell arteritis (GCA), i.e. large-artery involvement in patients with or without clinically apparent temporal arteritis (cranial GCA). Extracranial GCA is increasingly recognised, both in patients with cranial GCA and with solitary extracranial GCA, due to increased awareness among physicians and development of modern imaging modalities. The literature on the pathogenesis and histopathology of extracranial GCA is scarce. It is considered to be similar to cranial GCA. Patients with solitary extracranial GCA often present with non-specific signs and symptoms, although vascular manifestations, mostly secondary to stenosis, may occur. Due to the non-specific clinical presentation and low sensitivity of temporal artery biopsies, extracranial GCA is usually diagnosed by imaging. 18F-FDG-PET, MRI, CT angiography and ultrasound are used for this purpose. At present, the optimal diagnostic strategy is undetermined. The choice for a particular modality can be guided by the clinical scenario that raises suspicion of extracranial GCA, in addition to local availability and expertise. Extracranial complications in GCA consist of aortic aneurysm or dissection (mainly the ascending aorta), aortic arch syndrome, arm claudication and posterior stroke (although this is technically a cranial complication, it often results from stenosis of the vertebrobasilar arteries). Mortality is generally not increased in patients with GCA. Treatment of patients with solitary extracranial and those with extracranial and cranial GCA has been debated in the recent literature. In general, the same strategy is applied as in patients with temporal arteritis, although criteria regarding who to treat are unclear. Surgical procedures may be indicated, in which case optimal medical treatment prior to surgery is important.