Labelling and Clinical Performance of Human Leukocytes Labelled with 99mTc-HMPAO Using Leukokit® with Gelofusine versus Leukokit® with HES as Sedimentation Agent

Abstract EN

The scintigraphy with radiolabelled autologous leukocytes (WBCs) is considered the gold-standard technique for imaging infections.

Leukokit® is a commercially available, disposable, sterile kit for labelling WBCs ex vivo.

In this kit, WBCs isolation from red blood cells (RBCs) was performed using poly(O-2-hydroxyethyl)starch (HES) as the RBCs sedimentation agent.

Due to its poor availability, HES has been recently replaced by Gelofusine as the RBC sedimentation agent.

The aim of this study was to compare the labelling efficiency and the diagnostic accuracy of WBCs labelled with Leukokit® with HES vs Leukokit® with Gelofusine.

WBCs were isolated using HES or Gelofusine for 45 minutes and then purified from platelets (PLTs) and labelled with 1.1 ± 0.3 GBq of freshly prepared 99mTc-HMPAO.

The following parameters were evaluated: the number and type of recovered WBCs, RBCs contamination, PLTs contamination, vitality of neutrophils, and chemotactic properties of neutrophils.

Clinical comparison was performed between 80 patients (33 males; age 67.5 ± 14.2) injected with 99mTc-HMPAO-WBCs, using HES as the sedimentation agent, and 92 patients (38 males; age 68.2 ± 12.8) injected with 99mTc-HMPAO-WBCs using Gelofusine as the sedimentation agent.

Patients were affected by prosthetic joint infections, peripheral bone osteomyelitis, or vascular graft infection.

We compared radiolabelling efficiency (LE), final recovery yield (RY), and diagnostic outcome based on microbiology or 2-year follow-up.

Results showed that HES provides the lowest RBCs and PLTs contamination, but Gelofusine provides the highest WBC recovery.

Both agents did not influence the chemotactic properties of WBCs, and no differences were found in terms of LE and RY.

Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were also not significantly different for WBCs labelled with both agents (diagnostic accuracy 90.9%, CI = 74.9–96.1 vs 98.3%, CI = 90.8–100, for HES and Gelofusine, respectively).

In conclusion, Gelofusine can be considered a suitable alternative of HES for WBCs separation and labelling.