BACKGROUND: MRI detects small intracranial lesions, but has difficulties in differentiating between tumour, gliosis and edema. (11)C methionine-PET may help to overcome this problem. For its appropriate intra-operative use, it must be integrated into neuronavigation. We present the results of our pilot study with this method. METHOD: 32 patients with 34 intracranial lesions detected by MRI underwent additional (11)C methionine-PET, because the pathophysiological behaviour or the tumour delineation was unclear. All lesions were treated surgically. In 25 patients PET data could be integrated directly into cranial neuronavigation. FINDINGS: (11)C methionine uptake was observed in 27/34 lesions, 26 of them were tumours: 14 malignant and 7 benign gliomas, 3 gliomas without further histological typing, one Ewing sarcoma and one non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Only one (11)C methionine positive lesion was non-tumourous: it was staged as post-irradiation necrosis in a patient operated on for a malignant glioma. 3/7 (11)C-methionine negative lesions were classified as gliosis (n=2) and M. Whipple (n=1), but 4/7 were tumours: 2 astrocytomas WHO(degrees)II, 1 DNT and one astrocytoma WHO(degrees)III. The sensitivity of (11)C methionine-PET was 87%, the specificity 75%, the positive predictive value 96% and the negative predictive value 43%. In all tumourous cases with positive tracer uptake the borderline area of the tumour was better defined by (11)C methionine-PET than by MRI. INTERPRETATION: A positive (11)C methionine-PET is highly suspicious of a tumour, a negative one does not exclude it. (11)C methionine-PET seems to be more sensitive than MRI for differentiating between tumour and edema or gliosis. Simultaneous integration MRI and (11)C methionine-PET into cranial neuronavigation can facilitate cross total tumour removal in glioma surgery.
BACKGROUND: MRI detects small intracranial lesions, but has difficulties in differentiating between tumour, gliosis and edema. (11)C methionine-PET may help to overcome this problem. For its appropriate intra-operative use, it must be integrated into neuronavigation. We present the results of our pilot study with this method. METHOD: 32 patients with 34 intracranial lesions detected by MRI underwent additional (11)C methionine-PET, because the pathophysiological behaviour or the tumour delineation was unclear. All lesions were treated surgically. In 25 patients PET data could be integrated directly into cranial neuronavigation. FINDINGS: (11)C methionine uptake was observed in 27/34 lesions, 26 of them were tumours: 14 malignant and 7 benign gliomas, 3 gliomas without further histological typing, one Ewing sarcoma and one non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Only one (11)C methionine positive lesion was non-tumourous: it was staged as post-irradiation necrosis in a patient operated on for a malignant glioma. 3/7 (11)C-methionine negative lesions were classified as gliosis (n=2) and M. Whipple (n=1), but 4/7 were tumours: 2 astrocytomas WHO(degrees)II, 1 DNT and one astrocytoma WHO(degrees)III. The sensitivity of (11)C methionine-PET was 87%, the specificity 75%, the positive predictive value 96% and the negative predictive value 43%. In all tumourous cases with positive tracer uptake the borderline area of the tumour was better defined by (11)C methionine-PET than by MRI. INTERPRETATION: A positive (11)C methionine-PET is highly suspicious of a tumour, a negative one does not exclude it. (11)C methionine-PET seems to be more sensitive than MRI for differentiating between tumour and edema or gliosis. Simultaneous integration MRI and (11)C methionine-PET into cranial neuronavigation can facilitate cross total tumour removal in glioma surgery.
Authors: Nathalie L Albert; Michael Weller; Bogdana Suchorska; Norbert Galldiks; Riccardo Soffietti; Michelle M Kim; Christian la Fougère; Whitney Pope; Ian Law; Javier Arbizu; Marc C Chamberlain; Michael Vogelbaum; Ben M Ellingson; Joerg C Tonn Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2016-04-21 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Andor W J M Glaudemans; Roelien H Enting; Mart A A M Heesters; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Ronald W J van Rheenen; Annemiek M E Walenkamp; Riemer H J A Slart Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: N Sadeghi; I Salmon; C Decaestecker; M Levivier; T Metens; D Wikler; V Denolin; S Rorive; N Massager; D Baleriaux; S Goldman Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Norbert Galldiks; Roland Ullrich; Michael Schroeter; Gereon R Fink; Andreas H Jacobs; Lutz W Kracht Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 9.236