AIM: To evaluate the role of positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) in the surgical management of patients with pancreatic cancer, including the diagnosis, staging, and selection of patients for the subsequent surgical treatment. METHODS: This study involved 53 patients with proven primary pancreatic cancer. The sensitivity of diagnosing the primary cancer was examined for FDG-PET, CT, cytological examination of the bile or pancreatic juice, and the serum levels of carcinoembrionic antigens (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9). Next, the accuracy of staging was compared between FDG-PET and CT. Finally, FDG-PET was analyzed semiquantitatively using the standard uptake value (SUV). The impact of the SUV on patient management was evaluated by examining the correlations between the SUV and the histological findings of cancer. RESULTS: The sensitivity of FDG-PET, CT, cytological examination of the bile or pancreatic juice, and the serum levels of CEA and CA19-9 were 92.5%, 88.7%, 46.4%, 37.7% and 69.8%, respectively. In staging, FDG-PET was superior to CT only in diagnosing distant disease (bone metastasis). For local staging, the sensitivity of CT was better than that of FDG-PET. The SUV did not correlate with the pTNM stage, grades, invasions to the vessels and nerve, or with the size of the tumor. However, there was a statistically significant difference (4.6 +/- 2.9 vs 7.8 +/- 4.5, P = 0.024) in the SUV between patients with respectable and unresectable disease. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET is thus considered to be useful in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. However, regarding the staging of the disease, FDG-PET is not considered to be a sufficiently accurate diagnostic modality. Although the SUV does not correlate with the patho-histological prognostic factors, it may be useful in selecting patients who should undergo subsequent surgical treatment.
AIM: To evaluate the role of positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) in the surgical management of patients with pancreatic cancer, including the diagnosis, staging, and selection of patients for the subsequent surgical treatment. METHODS: This study involved 53 patients with proven primary pancreatic cancer. The sensitivity of diagnosing the primary cancer was examined for FDG-PET, CT, cytological examination of the bile or pancreatic juice, and the serum levels of carcinoembrionic antigens (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9). Next, the accuracy of staging was compared between FDG-PET and CT. Finally, FDG-PET was analyzed semiquantitatively using the standard uptake value (SUV). The impact of the SUV on patient management was evaluated by examining the correlations between the SUV and the histological findings of cancer. RESULTS: The sensitivity of FDG-PET, CT, cytological examination of the bile or pancreatic juice, and the serum levels of CEA and CA19-9 were 92.5%, 88.7%, 46.4%, 37.7% and 69.8%, respectively. In staging, FDG-PET was superior to CT only in diagnosing distant disease (bone metastasis). For local staging, the sensitivity of CT was better than that of FDG-PET. The SUV did not correlate with the pTNM stage, grades, invasions to the vessels and nerve, or with the size of the tumor. However, there was a statistically significant difference (4.6 +/- 2.9 vs 7.8 +/- 4.5, P = 0.024) in the SUV between patients with respectable and unresectable disease. CONCLUSION: FDG-PET is thus considered to be useful in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. However, regarding the staging of the disease, FDG-PET is not considered to be a sufficiently accurate diagnostic modality. Although the SUV does not correlate with the patho-histological prognostic factors, it may be useful in selecting patients who should undergo subsequent surgical treatment.
Authors: C G Diederichs; L Staib; J Vogel; B Glasbrenner; G Glatting; H J Brambs; H G Beger; S N Reske Journal: Pancreas Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: J Ruf; E Lopez Hänninen; M Böhmig; I Koch; T Denecke; M Plotkin; J Langrehr; B Wiedenmann; R Felix; H Amthauer Journal: Pancreatology Date: 2006-11-13 Impact factor: 3.996
Authors: A Sendler; N Avril; H Helmberger; J Stollfuss; W Weber; F Bengel; M Schwaiger; J D Roder; J R Siewert Journal: World J Surg Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Peter Einersen; Irene Epelboym; Megan D Winner; David Leung; John A Chabot; John D Allendorf Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2014-06-14 Impact factor: 3.452