PURPOSE: Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with [(111)In]-diethylene triamine pentaacetate acid (DTPA)-octreotide is an accurate method for detecting neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) but often does not provide clear anatomical localisation of lesions. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical usefulness of anatomical-functional image fusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients with known or suspected NET were included in the study. Planar and single-photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging was performed using a dual-head gamma camera equipped with an integrated X-ray transmission system, and the images were first interpreted alone by two nuclear medicine physicians and then compared with SPECT/CT fusion images together with a radiologist. The improvement provided by SPECT/CT in the interpretation of SPECT data alone and any modification in patient management were recorded. RESULTS: Fusion images improved SPECT interpretation in 23 cases, providing precise anatomical localisation of increased tracer uptake in 20 cases and disease exclusion in sites of physiological uptake in 5. In 10 patients, SPECT/CT allowed definition of the functional significance of lesions detected by diagnostic CT. SPECT/CT data modified clinical management in 14 cases by changing the diagnostic approach in 8 and the therapeutic modality in 6. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that image fusion is clearly superior to SPECT alone, allowing precise localisation of lesions and reducing false-positive results.
PURPOSE: Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with [(111)In]-diethylene triamine pentaacetate acid (DTPA)-octreotide is an accurate method for detecting neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) but often does not provide clear anatomical localisation of lesions. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical usefulness of anatomical-functional image fusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients with known or suspected NET were included in the study. Planar and single-photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging was performed using a dual-head gamma camera equipped with an integrated X-ray transmission system, and the images were first interpreted alone by two nuclear medicine physicians and then compared with SPECT/CT fusion images together with a radiologist. The improvement provided by SPECT/CT in the interpretation of SPECT data alone and any modification in patient management were recorded. RESULTS: Fusion images improved SPECT interpretation in 23 cases, providing precise anatomical localisation of increased tracer uptake in 20 cases and disease exclusion in sites of physiological uptake in 5. In 10 patients, SPECT/CT allowed definition of the functional significance of lesions detected by diagnostic CT. SPECT/CT data modified clinical management in 14 cases by changing the diagnostic approach in 8 and the therapeutic modality in 6. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that image fusion is clearly superior to SPECT alone, allowing precise localisation of lesions and reducing false-positive results.
Authors: E Even-Sapir; Z Keidar; J Sachs; A Engel; L Bettman; D Gaitini; L Guralnik; N Werbin; G Iosilevsky; O Israel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: D Hoyer; G I Bell; M Berelowitz; J Epelbaum; W Feniuk; P P Humphrey; A M O'Carroll; Y C Patel; A Schonbrunn; J E Taylor Journal: Trends Pharmacol Sci Date: 1995-03 Impact factor: 14.819
Authors: K Tharp; O Israel; J Hausmann; L Bettman; W H Martin; M Daitzchman; M P Sandler; D Delbeke Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2004-06-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: D Rubello; V Rufini; E De Carlo; C Martini; M L Calcagni; N Sicolo; L Troncone; D Casara Journal: Minerva Endocrinol Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.184
Authors: A Chiti; S Fanti; G Savelli; A Romeo; B Bellanova; M Rodari; B J van Graafeiland; N Monetti; E Bombardieri Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Date: 1998-10
Authors: I Buchmann; M Henze; S Engelbrecht; M Eisenhut; A Runz; M Schäfer; T Schilling; S Haufe; T Herrmann; U Haberkorn Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-05-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: R Graziani; A Brandalise; M Bellotti; R Manfredi; A Contro; M Falconi; L Boninsegna; R Pozzi Mucelli Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2010-03-09 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Rocio Garcia-Carbonero; Roberto Garcia-Figueiras; Alberto Carmona-Bayonas; Isabel Sevilla; Alex Teule; Maria Quindos; Enrique Grande; Jaume Capdevila; Javier Aller; Javier Arbizu; Paula Jimenez-Fonseca Journal: Cancer Metastasis Rev Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 9.264