PURPOSE: In a minority of cases a definite diagnosis and stage grouping in cancer patients is not possible based on the imaging information of PET/CT. We report our experience with percutaneous PET/CT-guided bone biopsies to histologically verify the aetiology of hypermetabolic bone lesions. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 20 consecutive patients who underwent multimodal image-guided bone biopsies using a dedicated PET/CT system in a step-by-step technique. Technical and clinical success rates of PET/CT-guided biopsies were evaluated. Questionnaires were sent to the referring physicians to assess the impact of biopsies on patient management and to check the clinical need for PET/CT-guided biopsies. RESULTS: Clinical indications for biopsy were to histologically verify the aetiology of metabolically active bone lesions without a morphological correlate confirming the suspicion of metastases in 15 patients, to determine the origin of suspected metastases in 3 patients and to evaluate the appropriateness of targeted therapy options in 2 patients. Biopsies were technically successful in all patients. In 19 of 20 patients a definite histological diagnosis was possible. No complications or adverse effects occurred. The result of PET/CT-guided bone biopsies determined a change of the planned treatment in overall 56% of patients, with intramodality changes, e.g. chemotherapy with palliative instead of curative intent, and intermodality changes, e.g. systemic therapy instead of surgery, in 22 and 50%, respectively. CONCLUSION: PET/CT-guided bone biopsies are a promising alternative to conventional techniques to make metabolically active bone lesions-especially without a distinctive morphological correlate-accessible for histological verification. PET/CT-guided biopsies had a major clinical impact in patients who otherwise cannot be reliably stage grouped at the time of treatment decisions.
PURPOSE: In a minority of cases a definite diagnosis and stage grouping in cancerpatients is not possible based on the imaging information of PET/CT. We report our experience with percutaneous PET/CT-guided bone biopsies to histologically verify the aetiology of hypermetabolic bone lesions. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 20 consecutive patients who underwent multimodal image-guided bone biopsies using a dedicated PET/CT system in a step-by-step technique. Technical and clinical success rates of PET/CT-guided biopsies were evaluated. Questionnaires were sent to the referring physicians to assess the impact of biopsies on patient management and to check the clinical need for PET/CT-guided biopsies. RESULTS: Clinical indications for biopsy were to histologically verify the aetiology of metabolically active bone lesions without a morphological correlate confirming the suspicion of metastases in 15 patients, to determine the origin of suspected metastases in 3 patients and to evaluate the appropriateness of targeted therapy options in 2 patients. Biopsies were technically successful in all patients. In 19 of 20 patients a definite histological diagnosis was possible. No complications or adverse effects occurred. The result of PET/CT-guided bone biopsies determined a change of the planned treatment in overall 56% of patients, with intramodality changes, e.g. chemotherapy with palliative instead of curative intent, and intermodality changes, e.g. systemic therapy instead of surgery, in 22 and 50%, respectively. CONCLUSION: PET/CT-guided bone biopsies are a promising alternative to conventional techniques to make metabolically active bone lesions-especially without a distinctive morphological correlate-accessible for histological verification. PET/CT-guided biopsies had a major clinical impact in patients who otherwise cannot be reliably stage grouped at the time of treatment decisions.
Authors: Eric Lis; Mark H Bilsky; Leszek Pisinski; Patrick Boland; John H Healey; Bernie O'malley; George Krol Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: J Aoki; H Watanabe; T Shinozaki; K Takagishi; H Ishijima; N Oya; N Sato; T Inoue; K Endo Journal: Radiology Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Didier Lardinois; Walter Weder; Thomas F Hany; Ehab M Kamel; Stephan Korom; Burkhardt Seifert; Gustav K von Schulthess; Hans C Steinert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: E Sala; E Mema; Y Himoto; H Veeraraghavan; J D Brenton; A Snyder; B Weigelt; H A Vargas Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2016-10-11 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Alda L Tam; Edward S Kim; J Jack Lee; Joe E Ensor; Marshall E Hicks; Ximing Tang; George R Blumenschein; Christine M Alden; Jeremy J Erasmus; Anne Tsao; Scott M Lippman; Waun K Hong; Ignacio I Wistuba; Sanjay Gupta Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 15.609