OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the diagnostic value of 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D: -glucose positron emission tomography ((18)F-FDG PET)/CT versus (18)F-FDG PET and CT alone for staging and restaging of pediatric solid tumors. METHODS: Forty-three children and adolescents (19 females and 24 males; mean age, 15.2 years; age range, 6-20 years) with osteosarcoma (n = 1), squamous cell carcinoma (n = 1), synovial sarcoma (n = 2), germ cell tumor (n = 2), neuroblastoma (n = 2), desmoid tumor (n = 2), melanoma (n = 3), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5), Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 7), non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (n = 9), and Ewing's sarcoma (n = 9) who had undergone (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging for primary staging or follow-up of metastases were included in this study. The presence, location, and size of primary tumors was determined separately for PET/CT, PET, and CT by two experienced reviewers. The diagnosis of the primary tumor was confirmed by histopathology. The presence or absence of metastases was confirmed by histopathology (n = 62) or clinical and imaging follow-up (n = 238). RESULTS: The sensitivities for the detection of solid primary tumors using integrated (18)F-FDG PET/CT (95%), (18)F-FDG PET alone (73%), and CT alone (93%) were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Seventeen patients showed a total of 153 distant metastases. Integrated PET/CT had a significantly higher sensitivity for the detection of these metastases (91%) than PET alone (37%; p < 0.05), but not CT alone (83%; p > 0.05). When lesions with a diameter of less than 0.5 cm were excluded, PET/CT (89%) showed a significantly higher specificity compared to PET (45%; p < 0.05) and CT (55%; p < 0.05). In a sub-analysis of pulmonary metastases, the values for sensitivity and specificity were 90%, 14%, 82% and 63%, 78%, 65%, respectively, for integrated PET/CT, stand-alone PET, and stand-alone CT. For the detection of regional lymph node metastases, (18)F-FDG PET/CT, (18)F-FDG PET alone, and CT alone were diagnostically correct in 83%, 61%, and 42%. A sub-analysis focusing on the ability of PET/CT, PET, and CT to detect osseous metastases showed no statistically significant difference between the three imaging modalities (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study showed a significantly increased sensitivity of PET/CT over that of PET for the detection of distant metastases but not over that of CT alone. However, the specificity of PET/CT for the characterization of pulmonary metastases with a diameter > 0.5 cm and lymph node metastases with a diameter of <1 cm was significantly increased over that of CT alone.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the diagnostic value of 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D: -glucose positron emission tomography ((18)F-FDG PET)/CT versus (18)F-FDG PET and CT alone for staging and restaging of pediatric solid tumors. METHODS: Forty-three children and adolescents (19 females and 24 males; mean age, 15.2 years; age range, 6-20 years) with osteosarcoma (n = 1), squamous cell carcinoma (n = 1), synovial sarcoma (n = 2), germ cell tumor (n = 2), neuroblastoma (n = 2), desmoid tumor (n = 2), melanoma (n = 3), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5), Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 7), non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (n = 9), and Ewing's sarcoma (n = 9) who had undergone (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging for primary staging or follow-up of metastases were included in this study. The presence, location, and size of primary tumors was determined separately for PET/CT, PET, and CT by two experienced reviewers. The diagnosis of the primary tumor was confirmed by histopathology. The presence or absence of metastases was confirmed by histopathology (n = 62) or clinical and imaging follow-up (n = 238). RESULTS: The sensitivities for the detection of solid primary tumors using integrated (18)F-FDG PET/CT (95%), (18)F-FDG PET alone (73%), and CT alone (93%) were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Seventeen patients showed a total of 153 distant metastases. Integrated PET/CT had a significantly higher sensitivity for the detection of these metastases (91%) than PET alone (37%; p < 0.05), but not CT alone (83%; p > 0.05). When lesions with a diameter of less than 0.5 cm were excluded, PET/CT (89%) showed a significantly higher specificity compared to PET (45%; p < 0.05) and CT (55%; p < 0.05). In a sub-analysis of pulmonary metastases, the values for sensitivity and specificity were 90%, 14%, 82% and 63%, 78%, 65%, respectively, for integrated PET/CT, stand-alone PET, and stand-alone CT. For the detection of regional lymph node metastases, (18)F-FDG PET/CT, (18)F-FDG PET alone, and CT alone were diagnostically correct in 83%, 61%, and 42%. A sub-analysis focusing on the ability of PET/CT, PET, and CT to detect osseous metastases showed no statistically significant difference between the three imaging modalities (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study showed a significantly increased sensitivity of PET/CT over that of PET for the detection of distant metastases but not over that of CT alone. However, the specificity of PET/CT for the characterization of pulmonary metastases with a diameter > 0.5 cm and lymph node metastases with a diameter of <1 cm was significantly increased over that of CT alone.
Authors: Tira Bunyaviroch; Timothy G Turkington; Terence Z Wong; John W Wilson; James G Colsher; R Edward Coleman Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2007-12-21 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Alireza Ahmadian; Mohammad R Ay; Javad H Bidgoli; Saeed Sarkar; Habib Zaidi Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2008-04-17 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: H E Daldrup-Link; C Franzius; T M Link; D Laukamp; J Sciuk; H Jürgens; O Schober; E J Rummeny Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: K U Juergens; M Weckesser; L Stegger; C Franzius; M Beetz; O Schober; W Heindel; D Wormanns Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: S Pauls; A K Buck; K Hohl; G Halter; M Hetzel; N M Blumstein; F M Mottaghy; G Glatting; S Krüger; L Sunder-Plassmann; P Möller; V Hombach; H-J Brambs; S N Reske Journal: Nuklearmedizin Date: 2007 Impact factor: 1.379
Authors: Josefine S Kornerup; Patrik Brodin; Charlotte Birk Christensen; Thomas Björk-Eriksson; Anne Kiil-Berthelsen; Lise Borgwardt; Per Munck Af Rosenschöld Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2014-11-07
Authors: Ashok J Theruvath; Florian Siedek; Anne M Muehe; Jordi Garcia-Diaz; Julian Kirchner; Ole Martin; Michael P Link; Sheri Spunt; Allison Pribnow; Jarrett Rosenberg; Ken Herrmann; Sergios Gatidis; Jürgen F Schäfer; Michael Moseley; Lale Umutlu; Heike E Daldrup-Link Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Priyanka Jha; Andreas M J Frölich; Beth McCarville; Oscar M Navarro; Paul Babyn; Robert Goldsby; Heike Daldrup-Link Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2010-02-24