Literature DB >> 14971621

An analysis of the physiological FDG uptake pattern in the stomach.

Hirofumi Koga1, Masayuki Sasaki, Yasuo Kuwabara, Kiyohisa Hiraka, Makoto Nakagawa, Koichiro Abe, Koichiro Kaneko, Kazutaka Hayashi, Hiroshi Honda.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to clarify the normal gastric FDG uptake pattern to provide basic information to make an accurate diagnosis of gastric lesions by FDG PET. We examined 22 cases, including 9 of malignant lymphoma, 8 of lung cancer, 2 of esophageal cancer, and 3 of other malignancies. No gastric lesions were observed in any of the 22 cases on upper gastrointestinal examinations using either barium meal or endoscopic techniques. The intervals between FDG PET and the gastrointestinal examination were within one week in all cases. The stomach regions were classified into the following three areas: U (upper)-area, M (middle)-area, and L (lower)-area. The degree of FDG uptake in these three gastric regions was qualitatively evaluated by visual grading into 4 degrees, and then a semiquantitative evaluation was carried out using the standardized uptake value (SUV). Based on a visual grading evaluation, the mean FDG uptake score in the U-, M-, and L-areas was 1.14 +/- 0.96, 0.82 +/- 0.96, and 0.36 +/- 0.49 (mean +/- S.D.), respectively. The FDG uptake scores obtained in the three areas were significantly different (Friedman test, p < 0.05). Furthermore, the rank order of the FDG uptake score in each case (U > or = M > or = L) was found to be statistically significant (Cochran-Armitage trend test, p < 0.05). The mean SUVs of 11 cases in the three areas were 2.38 +/- 1.03, 1.91 +/- 0.71, and 1.34 +/- 0.44 (mean +/- S.D.), respectively. The SUV in the U-area was significantly higher than that in the L-area (Friedman test, p < 0.05). A significant difference in FDG uptake was observed among the three gastric areas, and the FDG uptake extent in all cases was U > M > L. In conclusion, the physiological gastric FDG uptake was significantly higher at the oral end. A stronger gastric FDG uptake at the anal end may therefore be suggestive of a pathological uptake.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14971621     DOI: 10.1007/bf02984984

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Nucl Med        ISSN: 0914-7187            Impact factor:   2.668


  25 in total

1.  Standardized uptake value atlas: characterization of physiological 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose uptake in normal tissues.

Authors:  Yingbing Wang; Edison Chiu; Jarrett Rosenberg; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 2.  Imaging in assessing lymph node status in gastric cancer.

Authors:  Robert Michael Kwee; Thomas Christian Kwee
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 7.370

3.  A Comparison Study of Esophageal Findings on (18)F-FDG PET/CT and Esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

Authors:  KwanHyeong Jo; Soyoung Kim; Jongtae Cha; Sang Hyun Hwang; Narae Lee; Mijin Yun; Won Jun Kang
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-10-16

4.  Performance profile of a FDG-PET cancer screening program for detecting gastric cancer: results from a nationwide Japanese survey.

Authors:  Ryogo Minamimoto; Michio Senda; Seishi Jinnouchi; Takashi Terauchi; Tsuyoshi Yoshida; Tomio Inoue
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2014-02-23       Impact factor: 2.374

5.  Incremental diagnostic utility of gastric distension FDG PET/CT.

Authors:  Pierre-Yves Le Roux; Cuong P Duong; Carlos S Cabalag; Bimal K Parameswaran; Jason Callahan; Rodney J Hicks
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Difference in F-18 FDG Uptake After Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Colonoscopy in Healthy Sedated Subjects.

Authors:  Jong-Ryool Oh; Ji-Hyoung Seo; Woo-Jin Chang; Seung-Il Bae; In-Wook Song; Jin-Gu Bong; Hye-Yeon Jeong; So-Young Park; Jeongyup Bae; Hyundae Yoon
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-11-21

7.  Detectability of T-Measurable Diseases in Advanced Gastric Cancer on FDG PET-CT.

Authors:  Sun Young Oh; Gi Jeong Cheon; Young Chul Kim; Eugene Jeong; Seungeun Kim; Jae-Gol Choe
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-08-04

8.  Pretreatment F-18 FDG PET/CT Parameters to Evaluate Progression-Free Survival in Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Jeonghun Kim; Seok Tae Lim; Chang Ju Na; Yeon-Hee Han; Chan-Young Kim; Hwan-Jeong Jeong; Myung-Hee Sohn
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-11-28

9.  Detection of gastric cancer using 18F-FLT PET: comparison with 18F-FDG PET.

Authors:  Reiko Kameyama; Yuka Yamamoto; Kunihiko Izuishi; Ryusuke Takebayashi; Masanobu Hagiike; Makiko Murota; Masato Kaji; Reiji Haba; Yoshihiro Nishiyama
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Gastric and pulmonary lymphoma presenting as a solitary pulmonary nodule.

Authors:  El Thomas; Np Lenzo; R Troedson
Journal:  Biomed Imaging Interv J       Date:  2007-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.