PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted MRI (DW MRI), and (68)Ga-DOTATATE positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in the detection of intermediate to well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NET) of the pancreas. METHODS: Eighteen patients with pathologically proven pancreatic NET who underwent MRI including DW MRI and PET/CT within 6 weeks of each other were included in this retrospective study. Two radiologists evaluated T2-weighted (T2w), T2w + DW MRI, T2w + contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (CE T1w) MR images, and PET/CT for NET detection. The sensitivity and level of diagnostic confidence were compared among modalities using McNemar's test and a Wilcoxon signed rank test. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) of pancreatic NETs and normal pancreatic tissue were compared with Student's t test. RESULTS: Of the NETs, 8/23 (34.8 %) and 9/23 (39.1 %) were detected on T2w images by observers 1 and 2, respectively. Detection rates improved significantly by combining T2w images with DW MRI (observer 1: 14/23 = 61 %; observer 2: 15/23 = 65.2 %; p < 0.05) or CE T1w images (observer 1: 14/23 = 61 %; observer 2: 15/23 = 65.2 %; p < 0.05). Detection rates of pancreatic NET with PET/CT (both observers: 23/23 = 100 %) were statistically significantly higher than with MRI (p < 0.05). The mean ADC value of NET (1.02 ± 0.26 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) was statistically significantly lower than that of normal pancreatic tissue (1.48 ± 0.39 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s). CONCLUSION: DW MRI is a valuable adjunct to T2w imaging and comparable to CE T1w imaging in pancreatic NET detection, quantitatively differentiating between NET and normal pancreatic tissue with ADC measurements. (68)Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT is more sensitive than MRI in the detection of pancreatic NET.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted MRI (DW MRI), and (68)Ga-DOTATATE positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in the detection of intermediate to well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NET) of the pancreas. METHODS: Eighteen patients with pathologically proven pancreatic NET who underwent MRI including DW MRI and PET/CT within 6 weeks of each other were included in this retrospective study. Two radiologists evaluated T2-weighted (T2w), T2w + DW MRI, T2w + contrast-enhanced T1-weighted (CE T1w) MR images, and PET/CT for NET detection. The sensitivity and level of diagnostic confidence were compared among modalities using McNemar's test and a Wilcoxon signed rank test. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) of pancreatic NETs and normal pancreatic tissue were compared with Student's t test. RESULTS: Of the NETs, 8/23 (34.8 %) and 9/23 (39.1 %) were detected on T2w images by observers 1 and 2, respectively. Detection rates improved significantly by combining T2w images with DW MRI (observer 1: 14/23 = 61 %; observer 2: 15/23 = 65.2 %; p < 0.05) or CE T1w images (observer 1: 14/23 = 61 %; observer 2: 15/23 = 65.2 %; p < 0.05). Detection rates of pancreatic NET with PET/CT (both observers: 23/23 = 100 %) were statistically significantly higher than with MRI (p < 0.05). The mean ADC value of NET (1.02 ± 0.26 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) was statistically significantly lower than that of normal pancreatic tissue (1.48 ± 0.39 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s). CONCLUSION: DW MRI is a valuable adjunct to T2w imaging and comparable to CE T1w imaging in pancreatic NET detection, quantitatively differentiating between NET and normal pancreatic tissue with ADC measurements. (68)Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT is more sensitive than MRI in the detection of pancreatic NET.
Authors: M Papotti; M Bongiovanni; M Volante; E Allìa; S Landolfi; L Helboe; M Schindler; S L Cole; G Bussolati Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2002-03-23 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Wouter A P Breeman; Marion de Jong; Erik de Blois; Bert F Bernard; Mark Konijnenberg; Eric P Krenning Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2005-01-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: F L Giesel; C Kratochwil; A Mehndiratta; S Wulfert; J H Moltz; C M Zechmann; H U Kauczor; U Haberkorn; S Ley Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Marion De Jong; Roelf Valkema; Francois Jamar; Larry K Kvols; Dik J Kwekkeboom; Wout A P Breeman; Willem H Bakker; Chuck Smith; Stanislas Pauwels; Eric P Krenning Journal: Semin Nucl Med Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 4.446
Authors: James C Yao; Manal Hassan; Alexandria Phan; Cecile Dagohoy; Colleen Leary; Jeannette E Mares; Eddie K Abdalla; Jason B Fleming; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Asif Rashid; Douglas B Evans Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Thorsten D Poeppel; Ina Binse; Stephan Petersenn; Harald Lahner; Matthias Schott; Gerald Antoch; Wolfgang Brandau; Andreas Bockisch; Christian Boy Journal: Recent Results Cancer Res Date: 2013
Authors: M Falconi; B Eriksson; G Kaltsas; D K Bartsch; J Capdevila; M Caplin; B Kos-Kudla; D Kwekkeboom; G Rindi; G Klöppel; N Reed; R Kianmanesh; R T Jensen Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2016-01-05 Impact factor: 4.914