BACKGROUND: Accuracy of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and contribution to surgical decision making in recurrent or metastatic colorectal cancer were evaluated. METHODS: One hundred whole-body PET tests in colorectal cancer patients (1994 to 1998) were compared with computed tomography (CT), liver ultrasonography, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test. Mean follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG-PET for malignant findings were, respectively, 98%, 90% and 95%; for 87 CT scans, 91%, 72%, and 82%; for 98 CEA tests, 76%, 90%, and 82%; for detection of liver metastases with PET, 100%, 99%, and 99%; and for 68 ultrasound tests, 87%, 96%, and 93%. PET accuracy for local recurrence was 96%. Additional information was provided by PET in 86% of cases (abdomen, thorax, liver). PET influenced surgical decisions in 61% of cases. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET adds relevant accuracy to the conventional staging of patients with colorectal cancer and may cost-effectively help to select the appropriate treatment.
BACKGROUND: Accuracy of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and contribution to surgical decision making in recurrent or metastatic colorectal cancer were evaluated. METHODS: One hundred whole-body PET tests in colorectal cancerpatients (1994 to 1998) were compared with computed tomography (CT), liver ultrasonography, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test. Mean follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG-PET for malignant findings were, respectively, 98%, 90% and 95%; for 87 CT scans, 91%, 72%, and 82%; for 98 CEA tests, 76%, 90%, and 82%; for detection of liver metastases with PET, 100%, 99%, and 99%; and for 68 ultrasound tests, 87%, 96%, and 93%. PET accuracy for local recurrence was 96%. Additional information was provided by PET in 86% of cases (abdomen, thorax, liver). PET influenced surgical decisions in 61% of cases. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET adds relevant accuracy to the conventional staging of patients with colorectal cancer and may cost-effectively help to select the appropriate treatment.
Authors: A H Engledow; G E L Bond-Smith; D Francis; F Pakzad; J Bomanji; A Groves; P J Ell Journal: Indian J Surg Date: 2009-05-02 Impact factor: 0.656
Authors: Stefan Heinrich; Gerhard W Goerres; Markus Schäfer; Markus Sagmeister; Peter Bauerfeind; Bernhard C Pestalozzi; Thomas F Hany; Gustav K von Schulthess; Pierre-Alain Clavien Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Christina E Bailey; Chung-Yuan Hu; Y Nancy You; Harmeet Kaur; Randy D Ernst; George J Chang Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 3.840