Literature DB >> 22177157

Prospective evaluation of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computerized tomography to assess inguinal lymph node status in invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis.

Isabelle Souillac1, Jérôme Rigaud, Catherine Ansquer, Louis Marconnet, Olivier Bouchot.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We prospectively evaluated (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computerized tomography to assess inguinal lymph node status, the main prognostic factor in invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 2005 to January 2010, 30 patients with invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis from the department of urology at our institution were prospectively included in this study. Lymph node status was assessed preoperatively by positron emission tomography-computerized tomography to detect subclinical metastasis in 22 patients with initially cN0 disease and quantify inguinal lymph node invasion in 8 with cN+.
RESULTS: In the 22 cN0 cases (total of 44 inguinal lymph node basins analyzed) positron emission tomography-computerized tomography had 75% sensitivity and 87.5% specificity. Positive and negative predictive values were 37.5% and 97.2%, respectively. In the 8 cN+ cases (total of 16 inguinal lymph node basins analyzed) this type of imaging had 100% sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value. In 3 cases staged clinically as cN1 positron emission tomography-computerized tomography revealed several metabolically active lesions on the same side, which was confirmed by histological examination, up-staging these cases to pN2.
CONCLUSIONS: (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computerized tomography is a useful staging examination for invasive penile cancer. It confirms inguinal lymph node invasion and can detect subclinical inguinal lymph node invasion.
Copyright © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22177157     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  9 in total

Review 1.  Imaging the lymphatic system.

Authors:  Lance L Munn; Timothy P Padera
Journal:  Microvasc Res       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 3.514

Review 2.  [Penile cancer: diagnosis and staging].

Authors:  K-D Sievert; D-L Dräger; F-M Köhn; S Milerski; C Protzel; O W Hakenberg
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  Penile cancer: current therapy and future directions.

Authors:  G Sonpavde; L C Pagliaro; C Buonerba; T B Dorff; R J Lee; G Di Lorenzo
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  18F-FDG PET/CT as a prognostic factor in penile cancer.

Authors:  André Salazar; Eduardo Paulino Júnior; Paulo Guilherme O Salles; Raul Silva-Filho; Edna A Reis; Marcelo Mamede
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  The role of PET/CT imaging in penile cancer.

Authors:  Sarah R Ottenhof; Erik Vegt
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-10

6.  Clinical value of fluorine-18 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in penile cancer.

Authors:  Sheng Zhang; Wenfeng Li; Fei Liang
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-07-26

Review 7.  PET-CT and PET-MR in urological cancers other than prostate cancer: An update on state of the art.

Authors:  Abdul Razik; Chandan Jyoti Das; Sanjay Sharma
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

8.  How to deal with penile carcinoma inguinal metastases invading femoral vessels.

Authors:  Marius Fodor; Bogdan Petrut; Lucian Fodor
Journal:  Clujul Med       Date:  2017-10-20

Review 9.  Detection of lymph node metastases in penile cancer.

Authors:  Jonathan B Bloom; Michael Stern; Neel H Patel; Michael Zhang; John L Phillips
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-10
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.