UNLABELLED: Prior studies have documented increased (18)F-FDG adrenal activity in both benign and malignant pathologic conditions. When whole-body PET imaging is performed without CT anatomic coregistration, however, the normal adrenal gland is difficult to recognize. The purpose of this study was to investigate the normal adrenal appearance and standardized uptake value (SUV) using (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging. METHODS:Twenty patients with lymphoma with normal-appearing adrenal glands on prior CT examination (less than a 5% pretest likelihood of adrenal involvement) were studied. PET/CT imaging was performed 2 h after intravenous administration of (18)F-FDG. Unenhanced CT scans were acquired for attenuation correction and anatomic coregistration. PET images were reconstructed using an ordered-subsets expectation maximization algorithm and were corrected for body weight, dose, and radioactive decay. Ability to confirm visualization of the adrenal glands was determined for (18)F-FDG PET alone and for (18)F-FDG PET/CT by a consensus of 2 readers, and uptake of (18)F-FDG in the adrenal gland was compared with liver activity and scored visually (0 = no visualization, 1 = activity less than in liver, 2 = activity equal to liver activity, and 3 = activity greater than in liver). RESULTS: The 2 readers agreed on visualization of the adrenal glands with PET alone for 2 of 40 (5%) glands. With PET/CT, the readers agreed on visualization of 27 of 40 (68%) adrenal glands. Visual scores for normal adrenal activity ranged from 0 to 3, and maximum SUVs ranged from 0.95 to 2.46. Visual scoring of adrenal activity correlated well with both mean and maximal SUV (mean SUV vs. visual score: slope = 0.96, r = 0.88; maximum SUV vs. visual score: slope = 0.99, r = 0.87). CONCLUSION:PET/CT permits more reliable visualization of normal adrenal glands than does PET alone. Visual assessment of adrenal uptake correlates well with SUV measurement, and readers of PET/CT need to be aware of the wide range of normal adrenal uptake.
RCT Entities:
UNLABELLED: Prior studies have documented increased (18)F-FDG adrenal activity in both benign and malignant pathologic conditions. When whole-body PET imaging is performed without CT anatomic coregistration, however, the normal adrenal gland is difficult to recognize. The purpose of this study was to investigate the normal adrenal appearance and standardized uptake value (SUV) using (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging. METHODS: Twenty patients with lymphoma with normal-appearing adrenal glands on prior CT examination (less than a 5% pretest likelihood of adrenal involvement) were studied. PET/CT imaging was performed 2 h after intravenous administration of (18)F-FDG. Unenhanced CT scans were acquired for attenuation correction and anatomic coregistration. PET images were reconstructed using an ordered-subsets expectation maximization algorithm and were corrected for body weight, dose, and radioactive decay. Ability to confirm visualization of the adrenal glands was determined for (18)F-FDG PET alone and for (18)F-FDG PET/CT by a consensus of 2 readers, and uptake of (18)F-FDG in the adrenal gland was compared with liver activity and scored visually (0 = no visualization, 1 = activity less than in liver, 2 = activity equal to liver activity, and 3 = activity greater than in liver). RESULTS: The 2 readers agreed on visualization of the adrenal glands with PET alone for 2 of 40 (5%) glands. With PET/CT, the readers agreed on visualization of 27 of 40 (68%) adrenal glands. Visual scores for normal adrenal activity ranged from 0 to 3, and maximum SUVs ranged from 0.95 to 2.46. Visual scoring of adrenal activity correlated well with both mean and maximal SUV (mean SUV vs. visual score: slope = 0.96, r = 0.88; maximum SUV vs. visual score: slope = 0.99, r = 0.87). CONCLUSION: PET/CT permits more reliable visualization of normal adrenal glands than does PET alone. Visual assessment of adrenal uptake correlates well with SUV measurement, and readers of PET/CT need to be aware of the wide range of normal adrenal uptake.
Authors: Suman Jana; Tong Zhang; David M Milstein; Carmen R Isasi; M Donald Blaufox Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2005-09-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Henri J L M Timmers; Clara C Chen; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Millie Whatley; Alexander Ling; Graeme Eisenhofer; Kathryn S King; Jyotsna U Rao; Robert A Wesley; Karen T Adams; Karel Pacak Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Yon Mi Sung; Kyung Soo Lee; Byung Tae Kim; Joon Young Choi; Myung Jin Chung; Young Mog Shim; Chin A Yi; Tae Sung Kim Journal: Korean J Radiol Date: 2008 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.500