Jessica E Maxwell1, Scott K Sherman1, Yusuf Menda2, Donghong Wang1, Thomas M O'Dorisio3, James R Howe4. 1. Department of General Surgery, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa. 4. Department of General Surgery, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa. Electronic address: james-howe@uiowa.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS; octreoscan) is used in neuroendocrine tumors to locate the primary tumor site and delineate the extent of disease. SRS has decreased sensitivity for small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs). The reasons for SRS nonlocalization are not clear. We sought to determine factors that correlate with successful primary tumor localization by SRS in patients with resected SBNETs, and also identify factors that confound interpretation of SRS reports. METHODS: Records of patients with resected SBNETs were reviewed for SRS results, tumor size, multifocality, N, and M status. Somatostatin receptor 2 (SSTR2) expression was analyzed in resected tumors by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. SRS reports were reviewed and categorized as localizing the primary tumor or not. A nuclear medicine physician independently reviewed available images. RESULTS: Of 37 patients with preoperative SRS, the primary tumor was localized in 37%. Of all the factors tested, only small tumor size correlated significantly with SRS nonlocalization. Overexpression of SSTR2 was not significantly different between tumors that were or were not localized by SRS, regardless of tumor size. There were three instances where the SRS report did not agree with the nuclear medicine physician's interpretation as to whether SRS localized the primary tumor. In each case, uptake in mesenteric nodes was a confounding factor. CONCLUSIONS: SBNETs <2 cm are most likely to be missed by SRS. SSTR2 expression did not correlate with SRS nonlocalization of the primary tumor. Uptake in mesenteric nodes may help indicate an SBNET primary but can also interfere with its visualization within the small bowel.
BACKGROUND:Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS; octreoscan) is used in neuroendocrine tumors to locate the primary tumor site and delineate the extent of disease. SRS has decreased sensitivity for small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs). The reasons for SRS nonlocalization are not clear. We sought to determine factors that correlate with successful primary tumor localization by SRS in patients with resected SBNETs, and also identify factors that confound interpretation of SRS reports. METHODS: Records of patients with resected SBNETs were reviewed for SRS results, tumor size, multifocality, N, and M status. Somatostatin receptor 2 (SSTR2) expression was analyzed in resected tumors by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. SRS reports were reviewed and categorized as localizing the primary tumor or not. A nuclear medicine physician independently reviewed available images. RESULTS: Of 37 patients with preoperative SRS, the primary tumor was localized in 37%. Of all the factors tested, only small tumor size correlated significantly with SRS nonlocalization. Overexpression of SSTR2 was not significantly different between tumors that were or were not localized by SRS, regardless of tumor size. There were three instances where the SRS report did not agree with the nuclear medicine physician's interpretation as to whether SRS localized the primary tumor. In each case, uptake in mesenteric nodes was a confounding factor. CONCLUSIONS: SBNETs <2 cm are most likely to be missed by SRS. SSTR2 expression did not correlate with SRS nonlocalization of the primary tumor. Uptake in mesenteric nodes may help indicate an SBNET primary but can also interfere with its visualization within the small bowel.
Authors: Michael Gabriel; Clemens Decristoforo; Dorota Kendler; Georg Dobrozemsky; Dirk Heute; Christian Uprimny; Peter Kovacs; Elisabeth Von Guggenberg; Reto Bale; Irene J Virgolini Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: E P Krenning; W H Bakker; W A Breeman; J W Koper; P P Kooij; L Ausema; J S Lameris; J C Reubi; S W Lamberts Journal: Lancet Date: 1989-02-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Yusuf Menda; Thomas M O'Dorisio; James R Howe; Michael Schultz; Joseph S Dillon; David Dick; G Leonard Watkins; Timothy Ginader; David L Bushnell; John J Sunderland; Gideon K D Zamba; Michael Graham; M Sue O'Dorisio Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-02-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Kendall J Keck; Jessica E Maxwell; Yusuf Menda; Andrew Bellizzi; Joseph Dillon; Thomas M O'Dorisio; James R Howe Journal: Surgery Date: 2016-11-15 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Ajaykumar C Morani; Shiva Gupta; Khaled M Elsayes; Ahmad I Mubarak; Ahmed M Khalaf; Priya R Bhosale; Jia Sun; Corey T Jensen; Vikas Kundra Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: Allen B Choi; Jessica E Maxwell; Kendall J Keck; Andrew J Bellizzi; Joseph S Dillon; Thomas M OʼDorisio; James R Howe Journal: Pancreas Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 3.327