Literature DB >> 18830103

Liver lesion detection and characterization in patients with colorectal cancer: a comparison of low radiation dose non-enhanced PET/CT, contrast-enhanced PET/CT, and liver MRI.

Colin Patrick Cantwell1, Bindu N Setty, Nagaraj Holalkere, Dushyant V Sahani, Alan J Fischman, Michael A Blake.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare low-radiation dose non-enhanced fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18 FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) (NE-PET/CT), contrast-enhanced fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT (CE-PET/CT), and gadolinium-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the detection and characterization of liver lesions in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).
METHODS: In this retrospective review of imaging database of CRC patients with suspected liver metastases, 33 patients (22 men, 11 women; mean age, 63 years) evaluated with low-radiation dose NE-PET/CT, CE-PET/CT, and liver MRI were studied. The final diagnosis was established either by pathological examination or follow-up imaging over a period of at least 6 months for lesion stability or growth. The liver lesions were characterized on an ordinal scale of 0 to 6 (0 = absent, 1 = definitely benign, and 6 = definitely malignant). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to compare performance of the 3 imaging methods.
RESULTS: A total of 110 lesions were present on follow-up. The detection rate on low-radiation dose NE-PET/CT, CE-PET/CT, and MRI was 73.6%, 90.9%, and 95.4%, respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging (P < 0.001) and CE-PET/CT (P < 0.001) had a higher detection rate than low-radiation dose NE-PET/CT. There was no significant statistical difference in lesion detection between MRI and CE-PET/CT (P = 0.11). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for characterization of detected liver lesions on low-radiation dose NE-PET/CT were 67%, 60%, and 66%, respectively; those on CE-PET/CT were 85%, 100%, and 86%, respectively; and those on MRI were 98%, 100%, and 98%, respectively. Comparative receiver operating characteristic analysis showed an area under curve of 0.74 for low-radiation dose NE-PET/CT, 0.86 for CE-PET/CT, and 0.97 for MRI. There were statistically significant differences in the accuracy of MRI, low-radiation dose NE-PET/CT, and CE-PET/CT for lesion characterization.
CONCLUSIONS: When performing PET/CT, optimal detection and characterization of liver lesions require the use of a fused contrast-enhanced CT. Magnetic resonance imaging and CE-PET/CT have similar lesion detection rates. Magnetic resonance imaging is the best test for liver lesion characterization in patients with CRC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18830103     DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181591d33

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  7 in total

1.  PET/CT in lung cancer: Influence of contrast medium on quantitative and clinical assessment.

Authors:  Florian F Behrendt; Yavuz Temur; Frederik A Verburg; Moritz Palmowski; Thomas Krohn; Hubertus Pietsch; Christiane K Kuhl; Felix M Mottaghy
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-06-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Imaging strategies in the management of gastric cancer: current role and future potential of MRI.

Authors:  Alicia S Borggreve; Lucas Goense; Hylke J F Brenkman; Stella Mook; Gert J Meijer; Frank J Wessels; Marcel Verheij; Edwin P M Jansen; Richard van Hillegersberg; Peter S N van Rossum; Jelle P Ruurda
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  Diagnostic accuracy and impact on management of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT in colorectal liver metastasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Anna Margherita Maffione; Egesta Lopci; Christina Bluemel; Francesco Giammarile; Ken Herrmann; Domenico Rubello
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Assessment of SE-MRE-derived shear stiffness at 3.0 Tesla for solid liver tumors characterization.

Authors:  Andrés Dominguez; Daniel Fino; Juan Carlos Spina; Nicolas Moyano Brandi; Joaquín Capó; Maximiliano Noceti; Pedro Pablo Ariza; Guilherme Moura Cunha
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-10-24

Review 5.  Non-invasive diagnosis of focal liver lesions: an individualized approach.

Authors:  Wolfgang Schima; Claus Kölblinger; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2012-09-28       Impact factor: 3.909

6.  Microinvasion of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: predictive factors and application for determining clinical target volume.

Authors:  Yang Qian; Zhao-Chong Zeng; Yuan Ji; Yin-Ping Xiao
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging for colorectal liver metastasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yitao Mao; Bin Chen; Haofan Wang; Youming Zhang; Xiaoping Yi; Weihua Liao; Luqing Zhao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.