PURPOSE: In detecting pheochromocytoma (PHEO), positron emission tomography (PET) with the radiolabelled amine precursor (18)F-fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine ((18)F-DOPA) offers excellent specificity, while computed tomography (CT) provides high sensitivity and ability to localize lesions; therefore, the combination of these modalities could be advantageous in this setting. The aim of this study was to investigate whether combined (18)F-DOPA PET/CT more accurately detects and localizes PHEO lesions than does each modality alone. METHODS: (18)F-DOPA PET, CT and (18)F-DOPA PET/CT images of 25 consecutive patients undergoing diagnostic scanning of suspected sporadic or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 syndrome-associated PHEO were reviewed retrospectively in randomized sequence. Two blinded observers scored the images regarding the likelihood of PHEO being present and localizable. Results were correlated with subsequent clinical history and, when available, histology. RESULTS: Of the 19 lesions detected by all three modalities, PET identified each as positive for PHEO, but was unable to definitively localize 15 of 19 (79%). CT could definitively localize all 19 lesions, but could not definitively diagnose or exclude PHEO in 18 of 19 (95%) lesions. Furthermore, CT falsely identified as negative for PHEO one lesion which was judged to be positive for this tumor by both PET and PET/CT. Only in PET/CT scans were all 19 lesions accurately characterized and localized. On a per-patient basis, the sensitivity of (18)F-DOPA PET/CT for PHEO was 100% and the specificity 88%, with a 100% positive predictive value and an 88% negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: (18)F-DOPA PET/CT more accurately diagnoses and localizes adrenal and extra-adrenal masses suspicious for PHEO than do (18)F-DOPA PET or CT alone.
PURPOSE: In detecting pheochromocytoma (PHEO), positron emission tomography (PET) with the radiolabelled amine precursor (18)F-fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine ((18)F-DOPA) offers excellent specificity, while computed tomography (CT) provides high sensitivity and ability to localize lesions; therefore, the combination of these modalities could be advantageous in this setting. The aim of this study was to investigate whether combined (18)F-DOPA PET/CT more accurately detects and localizes PHEO lesions than does each modality alone. METHODS: (18)F-DOPA PET, CT and (18)F-DOPA PET/CT images of 25 consecutive patients undergoing diagnostic scanning of suspected sporadic or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 syndrome-associated PHEO were reviewed retrospectively in randomized sequence. Two blinded observers scored the images regarding the likelihood of PHEO being present and localizable. Results were correlated with subsequent clinical history and, when available, histology. RESULTS: Of the 19 lesions detected by all three modalities, PET identified each as positive for PHEO, but was unable to definitively localize 15 of 19 (79%). CT could definitively localize all 19 lesions, but could not definitively diagnose or exclude PHEO in 18 of 19 (95%) lesions. Furthermore, CT falsely identified as negative for PHEO one lesion which was judged to be positive for this tumor by both PET and PET/CT. Only in PET/CT scans were all 19 lesions accurately characterized and localized. On a per-patient basis, the sensitivity of (18)F-DOPA PET/CT for PHEO was 100% and the specificity 88%, with a 100% positive predictive value and an 88% negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: (18)F-DOPA PET/CT more accurately diagnoses and localizes adrenal and extra-adrenal masses suspicious for PHEO than do (18)F-DOPA PET or CT alone.
Authors: S Hoegerle; C Altehoefer; N Ghanem; G Koehler; C F Waller; H Scheruebl; E Moser; E Nitzsche Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Henri J L M Timmers; Mohiuddin Hadi; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Clara C Chen; Lucia Martiniova; Millie Whatley; Alexander Ling; Graeme Eisenhofer; Karen T Adams; Karel Pacak Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-09-14 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Helle-Brit Fiebrich; Adrienne H Brouwers; Michiel N Kerstens; Milan E J Pijl; Ido P Kema; Johan R de Jong; Pieter L Jager; Philip H Elsinga; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Jacqueline E van der Wal; Wim J Sluiter; Elisabeth G E de Vries; Thera P Links Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2009-07-21 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: L Reibring; H Agren; P Hartvig; J Tedroff; H Lundqvist; P Bjurling; T Kihlberg; B Långström Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 1992-12 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Juan P Brito; Noor Asi; Michael R Gionfriddo; Catalina Norman; Aaron L Leppin; Claudia Zeballos-Palacios; Chaitanya Undavalli; Zhen Wang; Juan P Domecq; Gabriela Prustsky; Tarig A Elraiyah; Larry J Prokop; Victor M Montori; Mohammad Hassan Murad Journal: Endocrine Date: 2015-02-06 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: David Taïeb; Rodney J Hicks; Elif Hindié; Benjamin A Guillet; Anca Avram; Pietro Ghedini; Henri J Timmers; Aaron T Scott; Saeed Elojeimy; Domenico Rubello; Irène J Virgolini; Stefano Fanti; Sona Balogova; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Karel Pacak Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-06-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Giorgio Treglia; Fabrizio Cocciolillo; Chiara de Waure; Francesco Di Nardo; Maria Rosaria Gualano; Paola Castaldi; Vittoria Rufini; Alessandro Giordano Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: David Taïeb; Henri J Timmers; Elif Hindié; Benjamin A Guillet; Hartmut P Neumann; Martin K Walz; Giuseppe Opocher; Wouter W de Herder; Carsten C Boedeker; Ronald R de Krijger; Arturo Chiti; Adil Al-Nahhas; Karel Pacak; Domenico Rubello Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-08-28 Impact factor: 9.236