Study design and data collection
This prospective study analysed 20 PET/CT scans from patients with confirmed AE, who were referred for staging or therapy monitoring between 2022 and 2024 at the ***anonymized for review***. Relevant clinical data, including patient demographics, laboratory results, and clinical and treatment information, were collected at the time of PET/CT.
The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee (BASEC-Nr. 2022 − 01493) and all patients provided written informed consent. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Imaging data acquisition
Patients fasted for at least four hours, and body weight, height, and blood glucose level were measured prior to the examination. FDG dosage was body-weight adjusted and injected on the scanner bed (6-ring Discovery MI Gen2, GE Healthcare). Dynamic and standard static PET/CT data sets were acquired in all patients. Dynamic imaging started either directly after injection, with a single bed covering the heart being acquired for 10 minutes (12x5seconds, 4x10seconds, 8x25seconds, 5x60seconds), followed by 11 whole-body dynamic frames over 46minutes (5 beds, 50 seconds/bed), or following an initial uptake time of 26 minutes followed by 7 frames over 29 minutes. Following the end of the dynamic acquisition, a static acquisition at 60 minutes post-injection (1.5 minutes/bed) was then performed. Reconstructed images, along with an aortic input function (IF), were used to generate MRFDG images (DynamicIQ; GEHealthCare), based on traditional Patlak analysis (11 frames, full IF) and relative Patlak analysis (7 frames, partial IF). The input function was corrected for blood to plasma partition and fitted with a bi-exponential model while preserving the area under the curve for the first 10 min where continuous sampling was available in standard Patlak analysis. Standard static PET/CT imaging was performed at 60 minutes post-injection, without changing the position of the patient in the arms-down position. A non-enhanced CT scan was used for attenuation correction.
Data analysis and definitions
Quantitative imaging parameters were measured in the lesions exhibiting the highest FDG uptake (i.e., maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) as well as MRFDG), and compared to normal/non-infected liver tissue (SUVratio and Patlak ratio). In line with a commonly used approach for assessing hepatic background - such as in lymphoma evaluation - we utilized SUVmax as the reference parameter [17]. Measurements were performed by two experienced, doubly board certified nuclear medicine physicians and radiologists using a dedicated workstation (Advantage Workstation, Version 4.7; GE HealthCare Biosciences, Pittsburgh, PA). In case of discrepancy, the data was reanalysed by both readers, and a consensus was reached.
Additionally, the readers quantified the number of detectable hepatic and extrahepatic lesions, as well as the size of the largest liver lesion. Disease extent was staged according to the. PNM classification (P = parasitic mass in the liver; N = involvement of neighboring organs; M = metastasis) as defined by the WHO Informal Working Group on Echinococcosis [2, 18–20]. The presence of calcifications within AE manifestations was categaorized as none, mild, intermediate or extensive.
Finally, serum samples, taken at the time of the PET/CT, were analyzed at the Institute of Parasitology, University of Zurich, using Em-18 antigens. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) for E. granulosus hydatid fluid (EgHF) were carried out as previously described by Kronenberg et. al [21].
Statistical analyses
Statistical analyses were conducted using commercially available software (IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 30). Quantitative variables were reported as mean ± standard deviation (range), while categorical variables were reported as frequencies and percentages. Differences in SUVratio and MRFDG ratio in AE manifestations were tested for significance using Mann-Whitney-U-test. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to compare absolute values of SUVratio and MRFDG ratio with EgHF antibodies. A p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.