PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic value of retrospective fusion of pelvic MRI and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET images for assessment of locoregional extension and nodal staging of endometrial cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with biopsy-proven endometrial cancer underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced PET/CT (PET/ceCT) and pelvic dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for initial staging. Diagnostic performance of PET/ceCT, contrast-enhanced MRI, and retrospective image fusion from PET and MRI (fused PET/MRI) for assessing the extent of the primary tumor (T stage) and metastasis to regional LNs (N stage) was evaluated by two experienced readers. Histopathological and follow-up imaging results were used as the gold standard. The McNemar test was employed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Fused PET/MRI and MRI detected 96.7% of the primary tumors, whereas PET/ceCT detected 93.3%. Accuracy for T status was 80.0% for fused PET/MRI, and MRI proved significantly more accurate than PET/ceCT, which had an accuracy of 60.0% (p=0.041). Patient-based sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for detecting pelvic nodal metastasis were 100%, 96.3% and 96.7% for both fused PET/MRI and PET/ceCT, and 66.7%, 100% and 96.7% for MRI, respectively. These three parameters were not statistically significant (p=1). CONCLUSION: Fused PET/MRI, which complements the individual advantages of MRI and PET, is a valuable technique for assessment of the primary tumor and nodal staging in patients with endometrial cancer. Crown
PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic value of retrospective fusion of pelvic MRI and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET images for assessment of locoregional extension and nodal staging of endometrial cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with biopsy-proven endometrial cancer underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced PET/CT (PET/ceCT) and pelvic dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for initial staging. Diagnostic performance of PET/ceCT, contrast-enhanced MRI, and retrospective image fusion from PET and MRI (fused PET/MRI) for assessing the extent of the primary tumor (T stage) and metastasis to regional LNs (N stage) was evaluated by two experienced readers. Histopathological and follow-up imaging results were used as the gold standard. The McNemar test was employed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Fused PET/MRI and MRI detected 96.7% of the primary tumors, whereas PET/ceCT detected 93.3%. Accuracy for T status was 80.0% for fused PET/MRI, and MRI proved significantly more accurate than PET/ceCT, which had an accuracy of 60.0% (p=0.041). Patient-based sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for detecting pelvic nodal metastasis were 100%, 96.3% and 96.7% for both fused PET/MRI and PET/ceCT, and 66.7%, 100% and 96.7% for MRI, respectively. These three parameters were not statistically significant (p=1). CONCLUSION: Fused PET/MRI, which complements the individual advantages of MRI and PET, is a valuable technique for assessment of the primary tumor and nodal staging in patients with endometrial cancer. Crown
Authors: Lisa A Min; Wouter V Vogel; Max J Lahaye; Monique Maas; Maarten L Donswijk; Erik Vegt; Miranda Kusters; Henry J Zijlmans; Katarzyna Jóźwiak; Sander Roberti; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Doenja M J Lambregts Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-05-22 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Casper Reijnen; Joanna IntHout; Leon F A G Massuger; Fleur Strobbe; Heidi V N Küsters-Vandevelde; Ingfrid S Haldorsen; Marc P L M Snijders; Johanna M A Pijnenborg Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-06-11
Authors: Marcelo A Queiroz; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Nik Hauser; Bianka Freiwald-Chilla; Gustav von Schulthess; Johannes M Froehlich; Patrick Veit-Haibach Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-05-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Marcelo A Queiroz; Martin Hüllner; Felix Kuhn; Gerhardt Huber; Christian Meerwein; Spyros Kollias; Gustav von Schulthess; Patrick Veit-Haibach Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Alessandro Stecco; Francesco Buemi; Alessia Cassarà; Roberta Matheoud; Gian Mauro Sacchetti; Alberto Arnulfo; Marco Brambilla; Alessandro Carriero Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2016-03-31 Impact factor: 3.469