BACKGROUND: Comparison of the diagnostic validity of positron emission tomography (PET) alone with integrated PET and CT (PET/CT) in the search for occult primary tumors in patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP) site in the head and neck. METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients with clinical CUP were investigated with PET and 38 patients with PET/CT. After initial diagnostic panendoscopy and histological confirmation of the cervical lymph node metastasis, either PET or PET/CT scanning was performed. RESULTS: Integrated PET/CT had a significantly higher overall detection rate than dedicated PET alone (55.2% vs 30.8%; p = .039) and positive prediction rate (93.3% vs 46.1%; p = .01). CONCLUSION: Integrated PET/CT showed to be superior to PET in the detection of the primary site of clinically occult tumors in CUP syndrome. However, a negative result should still be investigated further by means of panendoscopy with tonsillectomy and blind biopsies.
BACKGROUND: Comparison of the diagnostic validity of positron emission tomography (PET) alone with integrated PET and CT (PET/CT) in the search for occult primary tumors in patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP) site in the head and neck. METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients with clinical CUP were investigated with PET and 38 patients with PET/CT. After initial diagnostic panendoscopy and histological confirmation of the cervical lymph node metastasis, either PET or PET/CT scanning was performed. RESULTS: Integrated PET/CT had a significantly higher overall detection rate than dedicated PET alone (55.2% vs 30.8%; p = .039) and positive prediction rate (93.3% vs 46.1%; p = .01). CONCLUSION: Integrated PET/CT showed to be superior to PET in the detection of the primary site of clinically occult tumors in CUP syndrome. However, a negative result should still be investigated further by means of panendoscopy with tonsillectomy and blind biopsies.
Authors: Kyung Won Kim; Katherine M Krajewski; Jyothi P Jagannathan; Mizuki Nishino; Atul B Shinagare; Jason L Hornick; Nikhil H Ramaiya Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Anne Kirstine H Møller; Annika Loft; Anne K Berthelsen; Karen D Pedersen; Jesper Graff; Charlotte B Christensen; Junia C Costa; Lene T Skovgaard; Katharina Perell; Bodil L Petersen; Gedske Daugaard Journal: Oncologist Date: 2012-06-18
Authors: Kasim Durmus; Sanjeet V Rangarajan; Matthew O Old; Amit Agrawal; Theodoros N Teknos; Enver Ozer Journal: Head Neck Date: 2013-09-02 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: P Pittoni; S Di Lascio; M Conti-Beltraminelli; M C Valli; V Espeli; M Bongiovanni; A Richetti; O Pagani Journal: BMJ Case Rep Date: 2014-06-27
Authors: Karsten Beiderwellen; Johannes Grueneisen; Verena Ruhlmann; Paul Buderath; Bahriye Aktas; Philipp Heusch; Oliver Kraff; Michael Forsting; Thomas C Lauenstein; Lale Umutlu Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-09-16 Impact factor: 9.236