UNLABELLED: PET with a double-head gamma camera (hybrid PET) is a new approach to tumor imaging with 18F-FDG. This study was conducted to clarify the feasibility of whole-body FDG hybrid PET in the staging of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) in comparison with PET with a dedicated camera (dedicated PET) and to compare the results of both FDG studies with those of CT and 67Ga scanning as conventional imaging studies (CIS). METHODS: Thirty patients with NHL were prospectively evaluated. The results of the imaging studies regarding detection of the sites involved and staging were compared with each other and with those of the reference standard based on the final overall clinical evaluation. RESULTS: Of the total of 206 sites, whole-body FDG hybrid PET and dedicated PET detected 159 sites (77.2%) and 179 sites (86.9%), respectively. Eighteen of the 20 sites missed by hybrid PET alone consisted of lesions < 1.5 cm. Both FDG studies provided concordant staging results in all but 2 patients. CIS, on the other hand, detected 164 (79.6%) of the 206 sites, 137 of which were also detected by hybrid PET. Hybrid PET detected an additional 22 sites not found by CIS, whereas CIS detected 27 additional sites. Hybrid PET and CIS provided concordant staging results in 19 patients. Hybrid PET correctly staged NHL in 5 additional patients, whereas CIS correctly staged NHL in only 1 additional patient. CONCLUSION: Whole-body FDG hybrid PET appeared to be an accurate method of staging NHL. Despite its poorer image quality compared with dedicated PET, hybrid PET provided NHL staging results comparable with those of dedicated PET. Hybrid PET also yielded results comparable with those of CIS. However, whole-body FDG hybrid PET is currently inadequate as a single modality for staging NHL and is complementary to CT.
UNLABELLED: PET with a double-head gamma camera (hybrid PET) is a new approach to tumor imaging with 18F-FDG. This study was conducted to clarify the feasibility of whole-body FDG hybrid PET in the staging of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) in comparison with PET with a dedicated camera (dedicated PET) and to compare the results of both FDG studies with those of CT and 67Ga scanning as conventional imaging studies (CIS). METHODS: Thirty patients with NHL were prospectively evaluated. The results of the imaging studies regarding detection of the sites involved and staging were compared with each other and with those of the reference standard based on the final overall clinical evaluation. RESULTS: Of the total of 206 sites, whole-body FDG hybrid PET and dedicated PET detected 159 sites (77.2%) and 179 sites (86.9%), respectively. Eighteen of the 20 sites missed by hybrid PET alone consisted of lesions < 1.5 cm. Both FDG studies provided concordant staging results in all but 2 patients. CIS, on the other hand, detected 164 (79.6%) of the 206 sites, 137 of which were also detected by hybrid PET. Hybrid PET detected an additional 22 sites not found by CIS, whereas CIS detected 27 additional sites. Hybrid PET and CIS provided concordant staging results in 19 patients. Hybrid PET correctly staged NHL in 5 additional patients, whereas CIS correctly staged NHL in only 1 additional patient. CONCLUSION: Whole-body FDG hybrid PET appeared to be an accurate method of staging NHL. Despite its poorer image quality compared with dedicated PET, hybrid PET provided NHL staging results comparable with those of dedicated PET. Hybrid PET also yielded results comparable with those of CIS. However, whole-body FDG hybrid PET is currently inadequate as a single modality for staging NHL and is complementary to CT.
Authors: Nieves Gómez León; Roberto C Delgado-Bolton; Lourdes Del Campo Del Val; Beatriz Cabezas; Reyes Arranz; Marta García; Jimena Cannata; Saturnino González Ortega; Mª Ángeles Pérez Sáez; Begoña López-Botet; Beatriz Rodríguez-Vigil; Marta Mateo; Patrick M Colletti; Domenico Rubello; José L Carreras Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Josephine N Rini; Rodolfo Núñez; Kenneth Nichols; Gene G Tronco; Maria Bernadette Tomas; Diane Hart; Gungor Karayalcin; John C Leonidas; Christopher J Palestro Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2004-11-12