PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of fluoro-18-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and dynamic-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the diagnosis of liver metastatic lesions from colon and other sources. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients with known or suspected metastatic lesions were scanned by both MRI and PET. Histopathology and/or clinical outcome, including cross-sectional imaging follow up, were used as a gold standard. RESULTS: Of 30 patients, 16 were positive by pathology and/or clinical outcome and 14 were negative for liver metastases. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values on MRI were 85.7%, 100%, 100%, and 89%, respectively, compared to 71%, 93.7%, 90.9%, and 79% on FDG-PET. The difference between the two methods was not significant (X(2) = 0.2, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study showed no significant difference in detection of liver metastases using MRI or FDG-PET. However, MRI has advantages in spatial resolution and lesion characterization. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of fluoro-18-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and dynamic-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the diagnosis of liver metastatic lesions from colon and other sources. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients with known or suspected metastatic lesions were scanned by both MRI and PET. Histopathology and/or clinical outcome, including cross-sectional imaging follow up, were used as a gold standard. RESULTS: Of 30 patients, 16 were positive by pathology and/or clinical outcome and 14 were negative for liver metastases. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values on MRI were 85.7%, 100%, 100%, and 89%, respectively, compared to 71%, 93.7%, 90.9%, and 79% on FDG-PET. The difference between the two methods was not significant (X(2) = 0.2, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study showed no significant difference in detection of liver metastases using MRI or FDG-PET. However, MRI has advantages in spatial resolution and lesion characterization. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Gitta Bleeker; Godelieve A M Tytgat; Judit A Adam; Huib N Caron; Leontien C M Kremer; Lotty Hooft; Elvira C van Dalen Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2015-09-29
Authors: D M Koh; G Brown; A M Riddell; E Scurr; D J Collins; S D Allen; I Chau; D Cunningham; N M deSouza; M O Leach; J E Husband Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-01-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jacqueline Dinnes; Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano; Yemisi Takwoingi; Seau Tak Cheung; Paul Nathan; Rubeta N Matin; Naomi Chuchu; Sue Ann Chan; Alana Durack; Susan E Bayliss; Abha Gulati; Lopa Patel; Clare Davenport; Kathie Godfrey; Manil Subesinghe; Zoe Traill; Jonathan J Deeks; Hywel C Williams Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-07-01