Literature DB >> 11920459

Comparison between positron emission tomography and computed tomography in the use of the assessment of esophageal carcinoma.

Hiroyuki Kato1, Hiroyuki Kuwano, Masanobu Nakajima, Tatsuya Miyazaki, Minako Yoshikawa, Hitoshi Ojima, Katsuhiko Tsukada, Noboru Oriuchi, Tomio Inoue, Keigo Endo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The role and potential value of positron emission tomography (PET) scanning in certain tumors has been widely investigated in recent years. The authors retrospectively assessed the performance of 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET in the assessment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC).
METHODS: The results using PET were compared with those using computed tomography (CT), and these were correlated with the pathologic findings. The authors studied 32 patients with thoracic esophageal SCC who had undergone radical esophagectomy.
RESULTS: Uptake of FDG in the primary tumor was found in 25 of the 32 (78.1%) cases. Comparison of the FDG uptake and the clinicopathologic findings showed that there was a significant association between the FDG uptake and each of the depth of tumor invasion (P < 0.05), occurrence of lymph node metastasis (P < 0.01), and lymphatic invasion (P < 0.01). The survival rate in cases with high FDG uptake (standardized uptake value [SUV], >3) was significantly lower than that in cases with low FDG uptake (SUV, < 3; P < 0.05). In the evaluation of lymph node staging by the detection of lymph node metastasis, FDG-PET showed 77.8% sensitivity, 92.9% specificity, and 84.4% accuracy, and CT scanning showed 61.1% sensitivity, 71.4% specificity, and 65.6% accuracy. Positron emission tomography scanning showed a high degree of accuracy in the neck, upper thoracic, and abdominal regions. However, in the mid- and lower thoracic regions, the sensitivity was very low. The smallest lymph node metastasis that was detected by FDG-PET imaging was 6 mm. The average size of lymph node metastasis that was undetected by FDG-PET scanning was 7.3 mm (range, 1-17 mm).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, FDG-PET may be used as a noninvasive diagnostic technique in assessing the aggressiveness of the tumor and the prognosis in patients with esophageal SCC. During the preoperative diagnostic procedures, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of lymph node staging is higher with FDG-PET than with CT imaging. In view of the high specificity of FDG-PET, it also gives useful information to guide the choice of treatment of esophageal carcinoma. Copyright 2002 American Cancer Society. DOI 10.1002/cncr.10330

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11920459

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  73 in total

1.  Inclusion of PET-CT into planning of primary or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy of esophageal cancer improves prognosis.

Authors:  Jan-Christopher Metzger; Daniel Wollschläger; Matthias Miederer; Peter Vaupel; Markus Moehler; Heinz Schmidberger; Arnulf Mayer
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 2.  18F-Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of gastrointestinal malignancies.

Authors:  B B Chin; R L Wahl
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  A case of a superficial carcinoma of the esophagus with isolated lymph node metastasis around the abdominal aorta.

Authors:  Tomoya Hatakeyama; Atsushi Shiozaki; Hitoshi Fujiwara; Daisuke Ichikawa; Kazuma Okamoto; Shuhei Komatsu; Yasutoshi Murayama; Hisashi Ikoma; Yoshiaki Kuriu; Masayoshi Nakanishi; Toshiya Ochiai; Yukihito Kokuba; Teruhisa Sonoyama; Eigo Otsuji
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 2.549

4.  Accuracy of PET-CT in predicting survival in patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Claire Brown; Ben Howes; Glyn G Jamieson; Dylan Bartholomeusz; Urs Zingg; Thomas R Sullivan; Sarah K Thompson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  [MSCT for staging and response evaluation of esophageal cancer].

Authors:  K Holzapfel; E J Rummeny; C Hannig; A J Beer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  Clinical significance of primary lesion FDG uptake for choice between oesophagectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection for resectable oesophageal squamous cell carcinomas.

Authors:  Masatoyo Nakajo; Masayuki Nakajo; Atsushi Tani; Yoriko Kajiya; Shunji Shimaoka; Akio Matsuda; Tatsuyuki Nioh; Tohru Nihara; Toyokuni Suenaga; Sadao Tanaka; Hiroshi Shirahama; Michiyo Higashi; Chihaya Koriyama
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Soft-Tissue Metastases From Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Jad M El Abiad; Russell K Hales; Adam S Levin; Carol D Morris
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG-PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Cuong P Duong; Helen Demitriou; Leann Weih; Anne Thompson; David Williams; Robert J S Thomas; Rodney J Hicks
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-02-10       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Diagnostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT for lymph node metastasis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Yamada; Masao Hosokawa; Kazuo Itoh; Toshinao Takenouchi; Yoshihiro Kinoshita; Tomohiro Kikkawa; Keita Sakashita; Shion Uemura; Yasunori Nishida; Takaya Kusumi; Shigeyuki Sasaki
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 10.  Nonsurgical approaches to esophageal malignancy.

Authors:  Darius Sorbi; David E Fleischer
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2003-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.