Literature DB >> 10853090

Distinguishing recurrent tumor and radiation necrosis with positron emission tomography versus stereotactic biopsy.

T P Thompson1, L D Lunsford, D Kondziolka.   

Abstract

With the recent approval of reimbursement for positron emission tomography (PET), it has become important to clarify the utility of this diagnostic study. We evaluated the utility of PET to distinguish radiation necrosis from recurrent tumor in a retrospective review of patients with primary glial neoplasms. Fifteen patients had preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI and PET images followed by stereotactic biopsy or craniotomy and histological confirmation. The sensitivity of PET was 43% (6/14) and the specificity was 100% (1/1). We examined the sensitivity of PET as a function of volumetric contrast enhancement on MRI. Eighty percent of true-positive PET studies occurred with volume enhancement greater than 10 cm(3). Seventy-five percent of false negatives occurred with volume enhancement less than 6 cm(3). Given the clinical significance of distinguishing tumor progression from radiation necrosis, we believe that PET is insufficient to resolve radiation necrosis versus tumor progression. Copyright 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10853090     DOI: 10.1159/000029743

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stereotact Funct Neurosurg        ISSN: 1011-6125            Impact factor:   1.875


  14 in total

1.  Support vector machine multiparametric MRI identification of pseudoprogression from tumor recurrence in patients with resected glioblastoma.

Authors:  Xintao Hu; Kelvin K Wong; Geoffrey S Young; Lei Guo; Stephen T Wong
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 2.  Brain tumors.

Authors:  Karl Herholz; Karl-Josef Langen; Christiaan Schiepers; James M Mountz
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.446

3.  Imaging changes after stereotactic radiosurgery of primary and secondary malignant brain tumors.

Authors:  Donald A Ross; Howard M Sandler; James M Balter; James A Hayman; Paul G Archer; Donna L Auer
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 4.130

4.  Brain irradiation: effects on normal brain parenchyma and radiation injury.

Authors:  Pia C Sundgren; Yue Cao
Journal:  Neuroimaging Clin N Am       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 2.264

5.  Diffusion-weighted imaging in the follow-up of treated high-grade gliomas: tumor recurrence versus radiation injury.

Authors:  Patrick A Hein; Clifford J Eskey; Jeffrey F Dunn; Eugen B Hug
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 18F-fluorothymidine PET in differentiating radiation necrosis from recurrent glioma.

Authors:  Michael S Enslow; Lauren V Zollinger; Kathryn A Morton; Regan I Butterfield; Dan J Kadrmas; Paul E Christian; Kenneth M Boucher; Marta E Heilbrun; Randy L Jensen; John M Hoffman
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 7.794

Review 7.  Discriminating radiation necrosis from tumor progression in gliomas: a systematic review what is the best imaging modality?

Authors:  Ashish H Shah; Brian Snelling; Amade Bregy; Payal R Patel; Danoushka Tememe; Rita Bhatia; Evelyn Sklar; Ricardo J Komotar
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 4.130

8.  The positive predictive value of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) PET in the diagnosis of a glioma recurrence after multimodal treatment.

Authors:  J H Mehrkens; G Pöpperl; W Rachinger; J Herms; K Seelos; K Tatsch; J C Tonn; F W Kreth
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 9.  Diagnostic accuracy of PET for recurrent glioma diagnosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  T Nihashi; I J Dahabreh; T Terasawa
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-11-01       Impact factor: 3.825

10.  Direct comparison of 18F-FDG and 11C-methionine PET in suspected recurrence of glioma: sensitivity, inter-observer variability and prognostic value.

Authors:  Koen Van Laere; Sarah Ceyssens; Frank Van Calenbergh; Tjibbe de Groot; Johan Menten; Patrick Flamen; Guy Bormans; Luc Mortelmans
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-08-10       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.