• J. Nucl. Med. · May 2010

    Comparative Study

    Value of retrospective fusion of PET and MR images in detection of hepatic metastases: comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI.

    • Olivio F Donati, Thomas F Hany, Caecilia S Reiner, Gustav K von Schulthess, Borut Marincek, Burkhardt Seifert, and Dominik Weishaupt.
    • Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. odonati@gmx.net
    • J. Nucl. Med. 2010 May 1; 51 (5): 692-9.

    UnlabelledThe purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of lesion detection and diagnostic confidence between (18)F-FDG PET/CT, gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI, and retrospectively fused PET and MRI (PET/MRI).MethodsThirty-seven patients (mean age +/- SD, 60.2 +/- 12 y) with suspected liver metastases underwent PET/CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI within 0-30 d (mean, 11.9 +/- 9 d). PET and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR image data were retrospectively fused. Images were reviewed independently by 2 readers who identified and characterized liver lesions using PET/CT, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, and PET/MRI. Each liver lesion was graded on a 5-point confidence scale ranging from definitely benign (grade of 1) to definitely malignant (grade of 5). The accuracy of each technique was determined by receiver-operating-characteristic analysis. Histopathology served as the standard of reference for all patients with malignant lesions.ResultsA total of 85 liver lesions (55 liver metastases [65%] and 30 benign lesions [35%]) were present in 29 (78%) of the 37 patients. Twenty-four (65%) of the 37 patients had liver metastases. The detection rate of liver lesions was significantly lower for PET/CT than for Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI (64% and 85%; P = 0.002). Sensitivity in the detection and characterization of liver metastases for PET/CT, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, PET/MRI in reader 1, and PET/MRI in reader 2 was 76%, 91%, 93%, and 93%, respectively; the respective specificity values were 90%, 100%, 87%, and 97%. The difference in sensitivity between PET/CT and PET/MRI was significant (P = 0.023). The level of confidence regarding liver lesions larger than 1 cm in diameter was significantly higher in PET/MRI than in PET/CT (P = 0.046). Accuracy values (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve) for PET/CT, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, PET/MRI in reader 1, and PET/MRI in reader 2 were 0.85, 0.94, 0.92, and 0.96, respectively.ConclusionThe sensitivity of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI and PET/MRI in the detection of liver metastases is higher than that of PET/CT. Diagnostic confidence was significantly better with PET/MRI than with PET/CT regarding lesions larger than 1 cm in diameter. Compared with Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, PET/MRI resulted in a nonsignificant increase in sensitivity and diagnostic confidence.

      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…