• J. Nucl. Med. · Sep 2008

    Controlled Clinical Trial

    Contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT: 1-stop-shop imaging for assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer.

    • Klaus Strobel, Stefan Heinrich, Ujwal Bhure, Jan Soyka, Patrick Veit-Haibach, Bernhard C Pestalozzi, Pierre-Alain Clavien, and Thomas F Hany.
    • Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Medical Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. klaus.strobel@usz.ch
    • J. Nucl. Med. 2008 Sep 1; 49 (9): 1408-13.

    UnlabelledPatients with pancreatic cancer continue to have a poor prognosis, with a 5-y survival rate of less than 5%. Surgery is the only treatment that offers a potential cure. Determining resectability is the principal goal of staging in pancreatic cancer patients. Our objective was to evaluate the value of combined contrast-enhanced (18)F-FDG PET/CT in assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer and to compare enhanced PET/CT with the performance of PET alone and unenhanced PET/CT.MethodsFifty patients (25 women and 25 men; mean age, 64.3 y; range, 39-84 y) with biopsy-proven pancreatic adenocarcinoma underwent enhanced (18)F-FDG PET/CT for the evaluation of resectability. Criteria for unresectability were distant metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis, arterial infiltration, or invasion of neighboring organs other than the duodenum. The performance of enhanced PET/CT regarding resectability was compared with that of PET alone and unenhanced PET/CT. Histology, intraoperative findings, and follow-up CT with clinical investigations were used as the reference standard.ResultsAccording to the reference standard, 27 patients had disease that was not resectable because of distant metastases (n=17), peritoneal carcinomatosis (n=5), or local infiltration (n=5). In the assessment of resectability, PET alone had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 44%, accuracy of 70%, positive predictive value of 61%, and negative predictive value of 100%; unenhanced PET/CT had respective values of 100%, 56%, 76%, 66%, and 100%; and enhanced PET/CT, 96%, 82%, 88%, 82%, and 96%. In 5 patients, unresectability was missed by all imaging methods and was diagnosed intraoperatively. Enhanced PET/CT was significantly superior to PET alone (P=0.035), and there was a trend for enhanced PET/CT to be superior to unenhanced PET/CT (P=0.070).ConclusionThe use of enhanced PET/CT as a 1-stop-shop imaging protocol for assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer is feasible and accurate. Enhanced PET/CT is significantly superior to PET alone.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…