Advertisement

Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

, Volume 52, Issue 5, pp 368–376 | Cite as

Quantitative Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography for Evaluation of Salivary Gland Dysfunction in Sjögren’s Syndrome Patients

  • Jihyun Kim
  • Hyunjong Lee
  • Hwanhee Lee
  • Ji-In Bang
  • Yeon-koo Kang
  • Sungwoo Bae
  • Yoo Sung Song
  • Won Woo Lee
Original Article
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to investigate the usefulness of quantitative salivary single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) using Tc-99m pertechnetate in Sjögren’s syndrome (SS).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed quantitative salivary SPECT/CT data from 95 xerostomic patients who were classified as either SS (n = 47, male:female = 0:47, age = 54.60 ± 13.16 y [mean ± SD]) or non-SS (n = 48, male:female = 5:43, age = 54.94 ± 14.04 y) by combination of anti-SSA/Ro antibody, labial salivary gland biopsy, unstimulated whole saliva flow rate, and Schirmer’s test. Thyroid cancer patients (n = 43, male:female = 19:24, age = 46.37 ± 12.13 y) before radioactive iodine therapy served as negative controls. Quantitative SPECT/CT was performed pre-stimulatory 20 min and post-stimulatory 40 min after injection of Tc-99m pertechnetate (15 mCi). The %injected dose at 20 min and the %excretion between 20 and 40 min were calculated for parotid and submandibular glands, generating four quantitative parameters: %parotid uptake (%PU), %submandibular uptake (%SU), %parotid excretion (%PE), and %submandibular excretion (%SE). The most useful parameter for SS diagnosis was investigated.

Results

The uptake parameters (%PU and %SU) were significantly different among the SS, non-SS, and negative controls (p = 0.005 for %PU and p < 0.001 for %SU, respectively), but the excretion parameters (%PE and %SE) were not (p > 0.05 for both). The %PU and %SU were significantly lower in SS than in the negative controls and non-SS (p < 0.05 for all pair-wise comparisons). Additionally, the %SU was significantly lower in non-SS than in the negative controls (p < 0.05). Receiver-operating characteristic analysis revealed that the %SU had the greatest area-under-the curve of 0.720 (95% confidence interval = 0.618–0.807). Using the optimal cut-off value of %SU ≤ 0.07%, SS was identified with a sensitivity of 70.21% and a specificity of 70.83%.

Conclusion

Reduced submandibular uptake of Tc-99m pertechnetate at 20 min (%SU) was proved useful for the diagnosis of SS. Quantitative salivary gland SPECT/CT holds promise as an objective imaging modality for assessment of salivary dysfunction and may facilitate accurate classification of SS.

Keywords

Sjögren’s syndrome Single-photon emission computed tomography Computed tomography Tc-99m pertechnetate Quantitation 

Notes

Funding Source

This work was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) and funded by the Ministry of Education (2015R1D1A1A01059146).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

Jihyun Kim, Hyunjong Lee, Hwanhee Lee, Ji-In Bang, Yeon-koo Kang, Sungwoo Bae, Yoo Sung Song, and Won Woo Lee declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

The study was approved by an institutional review board (IRB) and was performed in accordance with the ethical standards set in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Informed Consent

The need for patient’s informed consent was waived by the IRB.

References

  1. 1.
    Manthorpe R, Frost-Larsen K, Isager H, Prause JU. Sjogren's syndrome. A review with emphasis on immunological features. Allergy. 1981;36:139–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vitali C, Bombardieri S, Jonsson R, Moutsopoulos HM, Alexander EL, Carsons SE, et al. Classification criteria for Sjogren's syndrome: a revised version of the European criteria proposed by the American-European Consensus Group. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61:554–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shiboski CH, Shiboski SC, Seror R, Criswell LA, Labetoulle M, Lietman TM, et al. 2016 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for primary Sjogren's syndrome: a consensus and data-driven methodology involving three international patient cohorts. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vitali C, Bombardieri S, Moutsopoulos HM, Balestrieri G, Bencivelli W, Bernstein RM, et al. Preliminary criteria for the classification of Sjogren's syndrome. Results of a prospective concerted action supported by the European Community. Arthritis Rheum. 1993;36:340–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fujibayashi T, Sugai S, Miyasaka N, Hayashi Y, Tsubota K. Revised Japanese criteria for Sjogren's syndrome (1999): availability and validity. Mod Rheumatol. 2004;14:425–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fox RI, Robinson CA, Curd JG, Kozin F, Howell FV. Sjogren's syndrome. Proposed criteria for classification. Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29:577–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shiboski SC, Shiboski CH, Criswell L, Baer A, Challacombe S, Lanfranchi H, et al. American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for Sjogren's syndrome: a data-driven, expert consensus approach in the Sjogren's International Collaborative Clinical Alliance cohort. Arthritis Care Res. 2012;64:475–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vivino FB, Hermann GA. Role of nuclear scintigraphy in the characterization and management of the salivary component of Sjogren's syndrome. Rheum Dis Clin N Am. 2008;34:973–86 ix.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schall GL, Anderson LG, Wolf RO, Herdt JR, Tarpley TM Jr, Cummings NA, et al. Xerostomia in Sjogren's syndrome. Evaluation by sequential salivary scintigraphy. JAMA. 1971;216:2109–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schall GL, Larson SM, Anderson LG, Griffith JM. Quantification of parotid gland uptake of pertechnetate using a gamma scintillation camera and a “region-of-interest” system. Am J Roentgenol Radium Therapy, Nucl Med. 1972;115:689–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Solans R, Bosch JA, Galofre P, Porta F, Rosello J, Selva-O'Callagan A, et al. Salivary and lacrimal gland dysfunction (sicca syndrome) after radioiodine therapy. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:738–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Caglar M, Tuncel M, Alpar R. Scintigraphic evaluation of salivary gland dysfunction in patients with thyroid cancer after radioiodine treatment. Clin Nucl Med. 2002;27:767–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sugihara T, Yoshimura Y. Scintigraphic evaluation of the salivary glands in patients with Sjogren's syndrome. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988;17:71–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hakansson U, Jacobsson L, Lilja B, Manthorpe R, Henriksson V. Salivary gland scintigraphy in subjects with and without symptoms of dry mouth and/or eyes, and in patients with primary Sjogren's syndrome. Scand J Rheumatol. 1994;23:326–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Umehara I, Yamada I, Murata Y, Takahashi Y, Okada N, Shibuya H. Quantitative evaluation of salivary gland scintigraphy in Sjorgen's syndrome. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:64–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aung W, Yamada I, Umehara I, Ohbayashi N, Yoshino N, Shibuya H. Sjogren's syndrome: comparison of assessments with quantitative salivary gland scintigraphy and contrast sialography. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:257–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nishiyama S, Miyawaki S, Yoshinaga Y. A study to standardize quantitative evaluation of parotid gland scintigraphy in patients with Sjogren's syndrome. J Rheumatol. 2006;33:2470–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Ritt P, Vija H, Hornegger J, Kuwert T. Absolute quantification in SPECT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(Suppl 1):S69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bailey DL, Willowson KP. An evidence-based review of quantitative SPECT imaging and potential clinical applications. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:83–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suh MS, Lee WW, Kim YK, Yun PY, Kim SE. Maximum standardized uptake value of (99m)Tc hydroxymethylene diphosphonate SPECT/CT for the evaluation of temporomandibular joint disorder. Radiology. 2016;280:890–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee H, Kim JH, Kang YK, Moon JH, So Y, Lee WW. Quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography for technetium pertechnetate thyroid uptake measurement. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95:e4170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kim HJ, Bang JI, Kim JY, Moon JH, So Y, Lee WW. Novel application of quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography to predict early response to methimazole in Graves’ disease. Korean J Radiol. 2017;18:543–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim J, Lee HH, Kang Y, Kim TK, Lee SW, So Y, et al. Maximum standardised uptake value of quantitative bone SPECT/CT in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. Clin Radiol. 2017;72:580–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kang YK, Park S, Suh MS, Byun SS, Chae DW, Lee WW. Quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography for glomerular filtration rate measurement. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;51:338–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim JY, Kim JH, Moon JH, Kim KM, Oh TJ, Lee DH, et al. Utility of quantitative parameters from single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography in patients with destructive thyroiditis. Korean J Radiol. 2018;19:470–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kang JY, Jang SJ, Lee WW, Jang SJ, Lee YJ, Kim SE. Evaluation of salivary gland dysfunction using salivary gland scintigraphy in Sjogren's syndrome patients and in thyroid cancer patients after radioactive iodine therapy. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;45:161–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association management guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: The American Thyroid Association Guidelines Task Force on Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26:1–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Atkinson JC, Grisius M, Massey W. Salivary hypofunction and xerostomia: diagnosis and treatment. Dent Clin N Am. 2005;49:309–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vitali C, Moutsopoulos HM, Bombardieri S. The European Community Study Group on diagnostic criteria for Sjogren's syndrome. Sensitivity and specificity of tests for ocular and oral involvement in Sjogren's syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 1994;53:637–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nakamura T, Oshiumi Y, Yonetsu K, Muranaka T, Sakai K, Kanda S. Salivary SPECT and factor analysis in Sjogren's syndrome. Acta Radiol. 1991;32:406–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    van Acker F, Flamen P, Lambin P, Maes A, Kutcher GJ, Weltens C, et al. The utility of SPECT in determining the relationship between radiation dose and salivary gland dysfunction after radiotherapy. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:225–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chen J, Zhao X, Liu H, Zhou S, Yang Y, Li S, et al. A point-scoring system for the clinical diagnosis of Sjogren's syndrome based on quantified SPECT imaging of salivary gland. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0155666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hermann GA, Vivino FB, Shnier D, Krumm RP, Mayrin V, Shore JB. Variability of quantitative scintigraphic salivary indices in normal subjects. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:1260–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stephens LC, Schultheiss TE, Price RE, Ang KK, Peters LJ. Radiation apoptosis of serous acinar cells of salivary and lacrimal glands. Cancer. 1991;67:1539–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Raza H, Khan AU, Hameed A, Khan A. Quantitative evaluation of salivary gland dysfunction after radioiodine therapy using salivary gland scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun. 2006;27:495–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hermann GA, Vivino FB, Goin JE. Scintigraphic features of chronic sialadenitis and Sjogren's syndrome: a comparison. Nucl Med Commun. 1999;20:1123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Saito T, Fukuda H, Horikawa M, Ohmori K, Shindoh M, Amemiya A. Salivary gland scintigraphy with 99mTc-pertechnetate in Sjogren's syndrome: relationship to clinicopathologic features of salivary and lacrimal glands. J Oral Pathol Med. 1997;26:46–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Miyake H, Matsumoto A, Hori Y, Takeoka H, Kiyosue H, Hori Y, et al. Warthin's tumor of parotid gland on Tc-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy with lemon juice stimulation: Tc-99m uptake, size, and pathologic correlation. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:2472–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Adams BK, Al Attia HM, Parkar S. Salivary gland scintigraphy in Sjogren's syndrome: are quantitative indices the answer? Nucl Med Commun. 2003;24:1011–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Loutfi I, Nair MK, Ebrahim AK. Salivary gland scintigraphy: the use of semiquantitative analysis for uptake and clearance. J Nucl Med Technol. 2003;31:81–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nakada K, Ishibashi T, Takei T, Hirata K, Shinohara K, Katoh S, et al. Does lemon candy decrease salivary gland damage after radioiodine therapy for thyroid cancer? J Nucl Med. 2005;46:261–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jihyun Kim
    • 1
  • Hyunjong Lee
    • 1
  • Hwanhee Lee
    • 1
  • Ji-In Bang
    • 2
  • Yeon-koo Kang
    • 1
  • Sungwoo Bae
    • 1
  • Yoo Sung Song
    • 1
  • Won Woo Lee
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear MedicineSeoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of MedicineSeongnam-siSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Nuclear MedicineEwha Womans University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Institute of Radiation Medicine, Medical Research CenterSeoul National UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations