Diabetic Foot DiseaseNCT00194298
FDG-PET Imaging in Complicated Diabetic Foot
An observational study of Diabetic Foot Disease, run by University of Pennsylvania at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The main objective of the proposed research study is to determine the potential utilization of [18-F] Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with complicated diabetic foot, especially in the diagnosis or exclusion of osteomyelitis in this setting. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Diabetic Foot Disease
- What is being tested?
- FDG-PET Imaging
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 240 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2002to Feb 2027
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: 240 patients selected for entry into this study will be men or women of any ethnic background diagnosed with diabetic foot disease and/or patients with diabetes and suspected infection(s) below the hip by members of the Diabetes Center of the Department of Medicine, the Division of Vascular Surgery of the Department of Surgery at the University of Pennsylvania Health System (Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania), the Ankle and Foot Medical Centers of Delaware Valley (PENN Presbyterian Hospital, and the Pennsylvania Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Surgeons (Pennsylvania Hospital).
Who may be able to join
- The 240 patients selected for entry into this study will be men or women of any ethnic background diagnosed with diabetic foot disease by members of the team in the Diabetes Center of the Department of Medicine and the division of Vascular Surgery of the department of Surgery at the University of Pennsylvania Health System (Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania).
- Study I: FDG-PET imaging of patients with diabetic foot without clinical suspicion of osteomyelitis or deep-seated tissue infections The patients must have clinical diagnosis of uncomplicated diabetic foot. Each patient will undergo appropriate evaluation including history, physical examination, standard radiographic evaluation (including MRI), and grading of peripheral neuropathy using the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI). Patients will be divided into three groups, corresponding to MNSI score of 0-3, 4-8, and 9-13, which we will classify as mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. We intend to enroll 26 patients in each of the first two groups and 27 patients in the third.
- Study II: FDG-PET imaging of patients with diabetic foot and clinical suspicion of osteomyelitis or deep-seated infections The patients must have clinical diagnosis of complicated diabetic foot. These patients will be those suspected of having a deep-seated infection and may or may not be scheduled to undergo amputation or debridement of affected tissue. Each patient will undergo an appropriate evaluation including history, physical examination, radiologic examination including MRI, MNSI, and vascular assessment by segmental Doppler pressures and pulse wave recording.
Who cannot join
- Patients with complications of the foot with etiologies not related to diabetes will be excluded from this study.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104
About this study
Official title: FDG-PET Imaging in Complicated Diabetic Foot (Protocol Version Dated 3/01/2004)
The main objective of the proposed research study is to determine the potential utilization of [18-F] Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with complicated diabetic foot, especially in the diagnosis or exclusion of osteomyelitis in this setting. We intend to validate and establish the necessary criteria for making such a diagnosis and determine the accuracy of the technique through comparison with other existing modalities, including MRI, and patient outcome. We expect that at the completion of the proposed research, the role of these powerful imaging modalities will be clearly defined in the management of patients with this challenging and serious complication.
Read the detailed description
FDG-PET imaging is a promising imaging technique, which has the potential to overcome many of the shortcomings mentioned previously with regard to radiologic and scintigraphic methodologies. FDG is a diagnostic tracer utilized to measure the metabolic rates of normal and abnormal tissues. Many investigators have noted the affinity of FDG for active inflammatory and infectious disorders, such as sarcoidosis, the abdominal abscess, brain abscess, lung abscess, renal abscess, inflammatory pancreatic disease, lobar pneumonia, asthma, tuberculosis, colitis, sinusitis, myositis, mastitis, vasculitis, deep venous thrombosis, thyroiditis and other infections including those encountered in orthopedic patients.
According to the literature, the most accurate nuclear medicine modality for detecting infection associated with diabetic foot is the labeled WBC method. We hypothesize that FDG-PET imaging has several advantages over this method. Detection of infection by labeled WBC imaging is based upon the assumption that the administered cells will migrate to the sites of infection. Since the majority of the labeled leukocyte preparation consists of neutrophils, inflammatory/infectious processes with a predominantly neutrophilic infiltrate (acute infections) are likely to yield positive results. However, most infections associated with diabetic foot are sub-acute or chronic. Consequently, the dominant inflammatory cells involved are monocytes and lymphocytes. Therefore, labeled leukocytes are unlikely to detect chronic infection since very few monocytes and lymphocytes are labeled. In addition, the previous treatment (antibiotics, etc) can severely reduce the chemotropic effect of bacteria and therefore, fewer leukocytes will migrate to the infectious sites, rendering the labeled leukocyte method ineffective.
In contrast, the uptake of FDG in inflammatory cells reflects "in vivo labeling" of the existing cells at the site of infection soon after the administration of the compound. This would indicate that FDG-PET technique might allow imaging a substantially larger population of cells, which are residing in the area of infection and inflammation. Therefore, in addition to considerable simplification of procedures associated with the labeled WBC method, including the time required to complete the study, this approach may provide higher sensitivity for diagnosing infection in such settings. Furthermore, since FDG uptake does not rely upon leukocyte migration, treatment with antibiotics is less likely to affect its sensitivity in delineating the sites of infection. One possible advantage of the labeled WBC method over FDG-PET imaging is that high serum glucose levels do not appear to have an adverse effect on the test results with the former technique while hyperglycemia is known to decrease tumor cell FDG uptake. However, our preliminary results indicate that high glucose levels do not negatively affect FDG uptake by inflammatory cells. Based on these observations, FDG-PET imaging appears to be an attractive alternative to conventional techniques for the detection of infection.
FDG-PET imaging offers a unique tool for the diagnosis and management of the diabetic foot. Through the establishment of appropriate diagnostic criteria, a PET scan may prove to be highly accurate in localizing deep infections of bone and soft tissue associated with the complicated diabetic foot. By distinguishing these infections from inflammation, it has the potential to become the optimal diagnostic imaging technique with which to diagnose and manage patients with diabetic foot. Therefore, research studies designed to further validate the ability of this technique are essential to achieving this goal.
- Conditions
- Diabetic Foot Disease
- Being tested
- FDG-PET Imaging
- Keywords
- diabetic foot disease, osteomyelitis, charcot, neuropathy, hypoxia, [18 F] Fluorodeoxyglucose, Positron Emission Tomography Imaging
- Medical subject headings
- Osteomyelitis, Hypoxia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FDG-PET ImagingProcedure or surgery
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
SUV measurement from PET scan
Standardized Uptake Value
Measured: Following completion of PET scan
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Sep 2005 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2002
- Primary completionFeb 2027 (estimated)
- Study completionFeb 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Diabetic Foot DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of PennsylvaniaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 240 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Pennsylvania
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Abass Alavi, MD, Principal investigator, University of Pennsylvania
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00194298
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R01DK063579-04
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 13 Sep 2005
- Last updated
- 12 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- FDG-PET Imaging in Complicated Diabetic Foot (Protocol Version Dated 3/01/2004)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00194298
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- R01DK063579-04
- Conditions
- Diabetic Foot Disease
- Keywords
- diabetic foot disease, osteomyelitis, charcot, neuropathy, hypoxia, [18 F] Fluorodeoxyglucose, Positron Emission Tomography Imaging
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 240 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of PennsylvaniaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institutes of Health (NIH)
- Study start
- Oct 2002
- Primary completion
- Feb 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Feb 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 19 Sep 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The main objective of the proposed research study is to determine the potential utilization of [18-F] Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with complicated diabetic foot, especially in the diagnosis or exclusion of osteomyelitis in this setting. We intend to validate and establish the necessary criteria for making such a diagnosis and determine the accuracy of the technique through comparison with other existing modalities, including MRI, and patient outcome. We expect that at the completion of the proposed research, the role of these powerful imaging modalities will be clearly defined in the management of patients with this challenging and serious complication.
Detailed description
FDG-PET imaging is a promising imaging technique, which has the potential to overcome many of the shortcomings mentioned previously with regard to radiologic and scintigraphic methodologies. FDG is a diagnostic tracer utilized to measure the metabolic rates of normal and abnormal tissues. Many investigators have noted the affinity of FDG for active inflammatory and infectious disorders, such as sarcoidosis, the abdominal abscess, brain abscess, lung abscess, renal abscess, inflammatory pancreatic disease, lobar pneumonia, asthma, tuberculosis, colitis, sinusitis, myositis, mastitis, vasculitis, deep venous thrombosis, thyroiditis and other infections including those encountered in orthopedic patients.
According to the literature, the most accurate nuclear medicine modality for detecting infection associated with diabetic foot is the labeled WBC method. We hypothesize that FDG-PET imaging has several advantages over this method. Detection of infection by labeled WBC imaging is based upon the assumption that the administered cells will migrate to the sites of infection. Since the majority of the labeled leukocyte preparation consists of neutrophils, inflammatory/infectious processes with a predominantly neutrophilic infiltrate (acute infections) are likely to yield positive results. However, most infections associated with diabetic foot are sub-acute or chronic. Consequently, the dominant inflammatory cells involved are monocytes and lymphocytes. Therefore, labeled leukocytes are unlikely to detect chronic infection since very few monocytes and lymphocytes are labeled. In addition, the previous treatment (antibiotics, etc) can severely reduce the chemotropic effect of bacteria and therefore, fewer leukocytes will migrate to the infectious sites, rendering the labeled leukocyte method ineffective.
In contrast, the uptake of FDG in inflammatory cells reflects "in vivo labeling" of the existing cells at the site of infection soon after the administration of the compound. This would indicate that FDG-PET technique might allow imaging a substantially larger population of cells, which are residing in the area of infection and inflammation. Therefore, in addition to considerable simplification of procedures associated with the labeled WBC method, including the time required to complete the study, this approach may provide higher sensitivity for diagnosing infection in such settings. Furthermore, since FDG uptake does not rely upon leukocyte migration, treatment with antibiotics is less likely to affect its sensitivity in delineating the sites of infection. One possible advantage of the labeled WBC method over FDG-PET imaging is that high serum glucose levels do not appear to have an adverse effect on the test results with the former technique while hyperglycemia is known to decrease tumor cell FDG uptake. However, our preliminary results indicate that high glucose levels do not negatively affect FDG uptake by inflammatory cells. Based on these observations, FDG-PET imaging appears to be an attractive alternative to conventional techniques for the detection of infection.
FDG-PET imaging offers a unique tool for the diagnosis and management of the diabetic foot. Through the establishment of appropriate diagnostic criteria, a PET scan may prove to be highly accurate in localizing deep infections of bone and soft tissue associated with the complicated diabetic foot. By distinguishing these infections from inflammation, it has the potential to become the optimal diagnostic imaging technique with which to diagnose and manage patients with diabetic foot. Therefore, research studies designed to further validate the ability of this technique are essential to achieving this goal.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- 240 patients selected for entry into this study will be men or women of any ethnic background diagnosed with diabetic foot disease and/or patients with diabetes and suspected infection(s) below the hip by members of the Diabetes Center of the Department of Medicine, the Division of Vascular Surgery of the Department of Surgery at the University of Pennsylvania Health System (Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania), the Ankle and Foot Medical Centers of Delaware Valley (PENN Presbyterian Hospital, and the Pennsylvania Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Surgeons (Pennsylvania Hospital).
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- The 240 patients selected for entry into this study will be men or women of any ethnic background diagnosed with diabetic foot disease by members of the team in the Diabetes Center of the Department of Medicine and the division of Vascular Surgery of the department of Surgery at the University of Pennsylvania Health System (Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania).
- Study I: FDG-PET imaging of patients with diabetic foot without clinical suspicion of osteomyelitis or deep-seated tissue infections The patients must have clinical diagnosis of uncomplicated diabetic foot. Each patient will undergo appropriate evaluation including history, physical examination, standard radiographic evaluation (including MRI), and grading of peripheral neuropathy using the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI). Patients will be divided into three groups, corresponding to MNSI score of 0-3, 4-8, and 9-13, which we will classify as mild, moderate, and severe, respectively. We intend to enroll 26 patients in each of the first two groups and 27 patients in the third.
- Study II: FDG-PET imaging of patients with diabetic foot and clinical suspicion of osteomyelitis or deep-seated infections The patients must have clinical diagnosis of complicated diabetic foot. These patients will be those suspected of having a deep-seated infection and may or may not be scheduled to undergo amputation or debridement of affected tissue. Each patient will undergo an appropriate evaluation including history, physical examination, radiologic examination including MRI, MNSI, and vascular assessment by segmental Doppler pressures and pulse wave recording.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with complications of the foot with etiologies not related to diabetes will be excluded from this study.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| FDG-PET Imaging | Procedure or surgery | – |
Primary outcome
SUV measurement from PET scan
Time frame: Following completion of PET scan
Standardized Uptake Value
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 Mar 2026.
Related trials for Diabetic Foot Disease
Recruiting
PAW-Hydrogel for Chronic Wound Healing
Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU), Pressure Ulcer (PU)
Active, not recruiting
Wearable Insoles for Recurrent Diabetic Ulcer Prevention
Diabetes, Peripheral Neuropathy
Active, not recruiting
Evaluation of Personalized Nutritional Intervention on Wound Healing of Cutaneous Ulcers in Diabetics
Foot, Diabetic
Not yet recruiting
Efficacy Evaluation of Turmeric-Derived Nanoparticle Hydrogel for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcer Wounds
Diabete Mellitus
Not yet recruiting
Better Care Closer to Home: Enhancing Primary and Community Care
Diabetic Foot Disease, Recurrence
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Abass Alavi, MD principal investigator
University of Pennsylvania
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Diabetic Foot Disease, run by University of Pennsylvania at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
SUV measurement from PET scan (time frame: Following completion of PET scan). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 12 Mar 2026.