OBJECTIVE: The management of non-contrast-enhancing brain tumours largely depends on biopsy, which allows a differentiation of low-grade gliomas (LGG) from high-grade gliomas (HGG). The aim of this study was to compare positron emission tomography using 2-[(18)F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D: -glucose (FDG-PET) and O-(2-[(18)F]-fluoroethyl)-L: -tyrosine (FET-PET) in terms of providing target regions for biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive patients with newly diagnosed brain tumours (n = 11) or suspected recurrence of a known LGG (n = 4), in whom MRI demonstrated no contrast enhancement, were studied by both FET-PET and FDG-PET. FET-PET, FDG-PET and MRI data were fused, and then transferred to the neurosurgical navigation system, prior to neurosurgical interventions. RESULTS: Histology showed HGG (WHO grade III) in 6/15 and LGG (WHO grade II) in 9/15 patients. FET-PET revealed an increased intratumoural tracer uptake in 8/9 LGG and in 5/6 HGG. FDG-PET depicted hypermetabolic spots in 2/9 LGG and in 4/6 HGG. In 6 patients we observed an increased intratumoural uptake of both tracers. In 4 of them, the area of highest FET accumulation in the tumour corresponded to the focus of increased FDG uptake. CONCLUSIONS: FET-PET appears to be superior to FDG-PET for biopsy planning in non-contrast-enhancing brain tumours. FDG-PET does not provide any additional information in this issue.
OBJECTIVE: The management of non-contrast-enhancing brain tumours largely depends on biopsy, which allows a differentiation of low-grade gliomas (LGG) from high-grade gliomas (HGG). The aim of this study was to compare positron emission tomography using 2-[(18)F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D: -glucose (FDG-PET) and O-(2-[(18)F]-fluoroethyl)-L: -tyrosine (FET-PET) in terms of providing target regions for biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive patients with newly diagnosed brain tumours (n = 11) or suspected recurrence of a known LGG (n = 4), in whom MRI demonstrated no contrast enhancement, were studied by both FET-PET and FDG-PET. FET-PET, FDG-PET and MRI data were fused, and then transferred to the neurosurgical navigation system, prior to neurosurgical interventions. RESULTS: Histology showed HGG (WHO grade III) in 6/15 and LGG (WHO grade II) in 9/15 patients. FET-PET revealed an increased intratumoural tracer uptake in 8/9 LGG and in 5/6 HGG. FDG-PET depicted hypermetabolic spots in 2/9 LGG and in 4/6 HGG. In 6 patients we observed an increased intratumoural uptake of both tracers. In 4 of them, the area of highest FET accumulation in the tumour corresponded to the focus of increased FDG uptake. CONCLUSIONS: FET-PET appears to be superior to FDG-PET for biopsy planning in non-contrast-enhancing brain tumours. FDG-PET does not provide any additional information in this issue.
Authors: K Källén; M Heiling; A M Andersson; A Brun; S Holtås; E Ryding; I Rosén Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Benoit Pirotte; Serge Goldman; Nicolas Massager; Philippe David; David Wikler; Maurice Lipszyc; Isabelle Salmon; Jacques Brotchi; Marc Levivier Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: M D Martínez del Valle Torres; M Gómez Rio; A Rodríguez Fernández; G Sabatel Hernandez; S Ortega Lozano; C Ramos Font; M Bellon Guardia; E López Ramírez; J M Llamas Elvira Journal: Rev Esp Med Nucl Date: 2004 Sep-Oct
Authors: Alexander M Spence; Mark Muzi; David A Mankoff; S Finbarr O'Sullivan; Jeanne M Link; Thomas K Lewellen; Barbara Lewellen; Pam Pham; Satoshi Minoshima; Kristin Swanson; Kenneth A Krohn Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Karl J Langen; Michael Jarosch; Kurt Hamacher; Heinz Mühlensiepen; Friedrich Weber; Frank Floeth; Dirk Pauleit; Hans Herzog; Heinz H Coenen Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: K Roessler; B Gatterbauer; A Becherer; M Paul; K Kletter; D Prayer; R Hoeftberger; J Hainfellner; S Asenbaum; E Knosp Journal: Minim Invasive Neurosurg Date: 2007-10
Authors: Benoit Pirotte; Serge Goldman; Nicolas Massager; Philippe David; David Wikler; Arlette Vandesteene; Isabelle Salmon; Jacques Brotchi; Marc Levivier Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Nathalie L Jansen; Vera Graute; Lena Armbruster; Bogdana Suchorska; Juergen Lutz; Sabina Eigenbrod; Paul Cumming; Peter Bartenstein; Jörg-Christian Tonn; Friedrich Wilhelm Kreth; Christian la Fougère Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-04-11 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Olivia Kertels; Almuth F Kessler; Milena I Mihovilovic; Antje Stolzenburg; Thomas Linsenmann; Samuel Samnick; Stephanie Brändlein; Camelia Maria Monoranu; Ralf-Ingo Ernestus; Andreas K Buck; Mario Löhr; Constantin Lapa Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Martin Misch; Andreas Guggemos; Pablo Hernáiz Driever; Arend Koch; Frederik Grosse; Ingo G Steffen; Michail Plotkin; Ulrich-Wilhelm Thomale Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2014-09-18 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Jan Frederick Cornelius; Philipp Jörg Slotty; Gabriele Stoffels; Norbert Galldiks; Karl Josef Langen; Hans Jakob Steiger Journal: J Neurol Surg B Skull Base Date: 2013-04-01
Authors: Markus Hutterer; Martha Nowosielski; Daniel Putzer; Nathalie L Jansen; Marcel Seiz; Michael Schocke; Mark McCoy; Georg Göbel; Christian la Fougère; Irene J Virgolini; Eugen Trinka; Andreas H Jacobs; Günther Stockhammer Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 12.300