18F-FDGPET/CT: diabetes and hyperglycaemia

BACKGROUND: Some patients who undergo 18F-FDG PET/CT for neoplastic or benign disease are also affected by diabetes or hyperglycaemia. We propose different preparation procedures in patients (pts) with hyperglycaemia (acute, temporary or chronic) or diabetes (type 1 or 2) at the time of the 18F-FDG injection, in order to improve the diagnostic scheduling of 18F-FDG PET/CT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We evaluated a sample of 13,063 pts, examined in two different PET/CT centres, one with a stationary scanner (94.4%) and the other with a mobile device (5.6%). High blood sugar was present in 1,698 patients (13%) at the time of the 18F-FDG injection (hyperglycaemia was defined as fasting blood glucose > 11.1 mmol/l). We considered all 18F-FDG PET/CT tests performed over a period of 4 years (2006-2009). In the first 2 years (6,236 tests), scheduling was done directly by the administrative secretary. In the next two years, 6,827 pts underwent a preliminary visit to assess the test indications, medical history, and therapy as well as pre-test preparation. We evaluated different preparation protocols for hyperglycaemic or diabetic pts, especially those recommended in the guidelines of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) and Society of Nuclear Medicine (SNM). RESULTS: In the four-year period, 713/13,063 patients (5.45%) were rescheduled; of these, 78.8% were rescheduled in the two years before the implementation of our preparation protocols and 21.2% in the next two years. Before the implementation of our preparation protocols, 562 patients (9%) presented occasional, acute or chronic hyperglycaemia (56.7%), or diabetes (43.3%), requiring postponement of the test to a later date. The test was not performed in 17 of 6,236 pts (0.27%) because of blood glucose levels above 11.1 mmol/l for several days, while in 16/6236 pts (0.26%) the 18F-FDG injection was performed despite high blood glucose levels, in view of the clinical urgency. After the implementation of the preparation protocols, 2.2% of pts were rescheduled because of occasional, acute or chronic hyperglycaemia (79%), or diabetes (21%); 0.1% of pts did not undergo the test because of chronic high blood glucose levels. Although the administration of insulin is recommended in the EANM and SNM guidelines, in our new preparation procedures experience it was not necessary, because we reduced the numbers of hyperglycaemic pts thanks to screening at the preliminary visit and a subsequent good preparation of the patient before scheduling. CONCLUSIONS: The application of our preparation protocols improves the on-time performance and diagnostic accuracy, and increases patients' compliance. Copyright © 2013 Via Medica.