| PET/CT in malignant melanoma: contrast-enhanced CT versus plain low-dose CT. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 21210112 Owner: NLM Status: Publisher |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) versus non-enhanced low-dose CT (NECT) in the staging of advanced malignant melanoma with (18)F-fluordeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT. METHODS: In total, 50 (18)F-FDG PET/CT examinations were performed in 50 patients with metastasized melanoma. For attenuation correction, whole-body NECT was performed followed by diagnostic CECT with contrast agent. For the whole-body PET, (18)F-FDG was applied. Criteria for evaluation were signs of vital tumour tissue (extent of lesions, contrast enhancement, maximum standardized uptake value >2.5). Findings suspicious for melanoma were considered lesions. NECT, CECT and (18)F-FDG PET were evaluated separately, followed by combined analysis of PET/NECT and PET/CECT. Findings were verified histologically and/or by follow-up (>6 months). RESULTS: Overall, 232 lesions were analysed, and 151 proved to be metastases. The sensitivity of NECT, CECT, PET, PET/NECT and PET/CECT was 62, 85, 90, 97 and 100%, and specificity was 52, 63, 88, 93 and 93%, respectively. Compared to CECT, NECT obtained additional false-negative results: lymph node (n = 19) and liver/spleen metastases (n = 9). Misinterpreted physiological structures mainly caused additional false-positive findings (n = 17). In combined analysis of PET/NECT, six false-positive [other tumours (n = 2), inflammatory lymph nodes (n = 2), inflammatory lung lesion (n = 1), blood vessel (n = 1)] and five false-negative findings [liver (n = 3), spleen (n = 1), lymph node metastases (n = 1)] remained. On PET/CECT, six false-positive [inflammatory lymph nodes (n = 3), other tumours (n = 2), inflammatory lung lesion (n = 1)] and no false-negative findings occurred. However, additional false findings on PET/NECT (6 of 232) did not change staging compared to PET/CECT. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that it is justified to perform PET/NECT instead of PET/CECT for melanoma staging. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Thomas Pfluger; Henriette Ingrid Melzer; Vera Schneider; Christian La Fougere; Eva Coppenrath; Carola Berking; Peter Bartenstein; Mayo Weiss |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE Date: 2011-1-6 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging Volume: - ISSN: 1619-7089 ISO Abbreviation: - Publication Date: 2011 Jan |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2011-1-6 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 101140988 Medline TA: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Country: - |
Other Details:
|
Languages: ENG Pagination: - Citation Subset: - |
Affiliation:
|
Department of Nuclear Medicine, LMU, Munich, Germany. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Preoperative staging of lung cancer with PET/CT: cost-effectiveness evaluation alongside a randomize...
Next Document: Value of the radiolabelled GLP-1 receptor antagonist exendin(9-39) for targeting of GLP-1 receptor-e...