RATIONALE: Accurate diagnosis of head and neck paragangliomas is often complicated by biochemical silence and lack of catecholamine-associated symptoms, making accurate anatomical and functional imaging techniques essential to the diagnostic process. METHODS: Ten patients (seven SDHD, three SDHB), with a total of 26 head and neck paragangliomas, were evaluated with anatomical and functional imaging. This study compares five different functional imaging techniques [(18)F-fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine ((18)F-FDOPA) positron emission tomography (PET), (18)F-fluorodopamine ((18)F-FDA) PET/computed tomography (CT), (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT, (123)I-metaiodobenzylguanidine ((123)I-MIBG) scintigraphy, and (111)In-pentetreotide scintigraphy] in the localization of head and neck paragangliomas. RESULTS: Prospectively (18)F-FDOPA PET localized 26 of 26 lesions in the 10 patients, CT/magnetic resonance imaging localized 21 of 26 lesions, (18)F-FDG PET/CT localized 20 of 26 lesions, (111)In-pentetreotide scintigraphy localized 16 of 25 lesions, (18)F-FDA PET/CT localized 12 of 26 lesions, and (123)I-MIBG scintigraphy localized eight of 26 lesions. Differences in imaging efficacy related to genetic phenotype, even in the present small sample size, included the negativity of (18)F-FDA PET/CT and (123)I-MIBG scintigraphy in patients with SDHB mutations and the accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in all patients with SDHD mutations, as compared with the accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in only one patient with an SDHB mutation. CONCLUSION: Overall, (18)F-FDOPA PET proved to be the most efficacious functional imaging modality in the localization of SDHx-related head and neck paragangliomas and may be a potential first-line functional imaging agent for the localization of these tumors.
RATIONALE: Accurate diagnosis of head and neck paragangliomas is often complicated by biochemical silence and lack of catecholamine-associated symptoms, making accurate anatomical and functional imaging techniques essential to the diagnostic process. METHODS: Ten patients (seven SDHD, three SDHB), with a total of 26 head and neck paragangliomas, were evaluated with anatomical and functional imaging. This study compares five different functional imaging techniques [(18)F-fluorodihydroxyphenylalanine ((18)F-FDOPA) positron emission tomography (PET), (18)F-fluorodopamine ((18)F-FDA) PET/computed tomography (CT), (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT, (123)I-metaiodobenzylguanidine ((123)I-MIBG) scintigraphy, and (111)In-pentetreotide scintigraphy] in the localization of head and neck paragangliomas. RESULTS: Prospectively (18)F-FDOPA PET localized 26 of 26 lesions in the 10 patients, CT/magnetic resonance imaging localized 21 of 26 lesions, (18)F-FDG PET/CT localized 20 of 26 lesions, (111)In-pentetreotide scintigraphy localized 16 of 25 lesions, (18)F-FDA PET/CT localized 12 of 26 lesions, and (123)I-MIBG scintigraphy localized eight of 26 lesions. Differences in imaging efficacy related to genetic phenotype, even in the present small sample size, included the negativity of (18)F-FDA PET/CT and (123)I-MIBG scintigraphy in patients with SDHB mutations and the accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in all patients with SDHD mutations, as compared with the accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in only one patient with an SDHB mutation. CONCLUSION: Overall, (18)F-FDOPA PET proved to be the most efficacious functional imaging modality in the localization of SDHx-related head and neck paragangliomas and may be a potential first-line functional imaging agent for the localization of these tumors.
Authors: D J Kwekkeboom; H van Urk; B K Pauw; S W Lamberts; P P Kooij; R P Hoogma; E P Krenning Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1993-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: E P Krenning; W H Bakker; P P Kooij; W A Breeman; H Y Oei; M de Jong; J C Reubi; T J Visser; C Bruns; D J Kwekkeboom Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1992-05 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: M A Muros; J M Llamas-Elvira; A Rodríguez; A Ramírez; M Gómez; M A Arráez; E Valéncia; R Vílchez Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: Lucia Martiniova; Susannah Cleary; Edwin W Lai; Dale O Kiesewetter; Jurgen Seidel; Linda F Dawson; Jacqueline K Phillips; David Thomasson; Xiaoyuan Chen; Graeme Eisenhofer; James F Powers; Richard Kvetnansky; Karel Pacak Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Ingo Janssen; Elise M Blanchet; Karen Adams; Clara C Chen; Corina M Millo; Peter Herscovitch; David Taieb; Electron Kebebew; Hendrik Lehnert; Antonio T Fojo; Karel Pacak Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 12.531
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: Tobias Else; Monica L Marvin; Jessica N Everett; Stephen B Gruber; H Alexander Arts; Elena M Stoffel; Richard J Auchus; Victoria M Raymond Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2014-04-23 Impact factor: 5.958