BACKGROUND: The role of fusion positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans (PET/CT) in staging of patients with pancreatic neoplasms (PN) is poorly defined. PET/CT may serve as an adjunct to standard imaging by increasing occult metastases detection. The purpose of this study was to assess the additional value, in relation to computed tomography (CT), of PET/CT imaging for patients with PN. METHODS: Eighty-two patients with potentially resectable PN underwent staging with PET/CT and CT of the chest and abdomen. Sensitivity of diagnosing pancreatic cancer by PET/CT avidity was evaluated. The sensitivity of detecting metastases was compared between PET/CT, standard CT, and the combination of PET/CT and CT. The impact of PET/CT on patient management was estimated by calculating the percentage of patients whose treatment plan was altered due to PET/CT. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT in diagnosing pancreatic cancer were 89% and 88%, respectively. Sensitivity of detecting metastatic disease for PET/CT alone, standard CT alone, and the combination of PET/CT and CT were 61%, 57%, and 87%, respectively. Findings on PET/CT influenced the clinical management in seven patients (11%), two with a supraclavicular lymph node (LN), two occult liver lesions, two peritoneal implants, and one peri-esophageal LN. CONCLUSION: This study evaluated PET/CT in the initial work-up of patients with PN. PET/CT increased sensitivity (87%) for detection of metastatic disease when combined with standard CT. In invasive cancer, PET/CT changed the management in 11% of our patients. PET/CT should be considered in the initial work-up of patients with potentially resectable pancreatic lesions.
BACKGROUND: The role of fusion positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans (PET/CT) in staging of patients with pancreatic neoplasms (PN) is poorly defined. PET/CT may serve as an adjunct to standard imaging by increasing occult metastases detection. The purpose of this study was to assess the additional value, in relation to computed tomography (CT), of PET/CT imaging for patients with PN. METHODS: Eighty-two patients with potentially resectable PN underwent staging with PET/CT and CT of the chest and abdomen. Sensitivity of diagnosing pancreatic cancer by PET/CT avidity was evaluated. The sensitivity of detecting metastases was compared between PET/CT, standard CT, and the combination of PET/CT and CT. The impact of PET/CT on patient management was estimated by calculating the percentage of patients whose treatment plan was altered due to PET/CT. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT in diagnosing pancreatic cancer were 89% and 88%, respectively. Sensitivity of detecting metastatic disease for PET/CT alone, standard CT alone, and the combination of PET/CT and CT were 61%, 57%, and 87%, respectively. Findings on PET/CT influenced the clinical management in seven patients (11%), two with a supraclavicular lymph node (LN), two occult liver lesions, two peritoneal implants, and one peri-esophageal LN. CONCLUSION: This study evaluated PET/CT in the initial work-up of patients with PN. PET/CT increased sensitivity (87%) for detection of metastatic disease when combined with standard CT. In invasive cancer, PET/CT changed the management in 11% of our patients. PET/CT should be considered in the initial work-up of patients with potentially resectable pancreatic lesions.
Authors: Margaret A Tempero; J Pablo Arnoletti; Stephen Behrman; Edgar Ben-Josef; Al B Benson; Jordan D Berlin; John L Cameron; Ephraim S Casper; Steven J Cohen; Michelle Duff; Joshua D I Ellenhorn; William G Hawkins; John P Hoffman; Boris W Kuvshinoff; Mokenge P Malafa; Peter Muscarella; Eric K Nakakura; Aaron R Sasson; Sarah P Thayer; Douglas S Tyler; Robert S Warren; Samuel Whiting; Christopher Willett; Robert A Wolff Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Eric Sorenson; Fernando Lambreton; Jian Q Yu; Tianyu Li; Crystal S Denlinger; Joshua E Meyer; Elin R Sigurdson; Jeffrey M Farma Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2019-06-21 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Sam G Pappas; Kathleen K Christians; Parag P Tolat; Alan P Mautz; Alysandra Lal; Lisa McElroy; T Clark Gamblin; Kiran K Turaga; Susan Tsai; Beth Erickson; Paul Ritch; Douglas B Evans Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 3.647