PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of F-fluoride PET or PET/CT compared with Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and F-FDG PET/CT in the detection of bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. All analyses were performed on Stata version 12.0 and Meta-DiSc version 1.4. RESULTS: Twenty articles containing 1170 patients were identified. On a patient basis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of F-fluoride PET or PET/CT were 92% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89%-95%), 93% (95% CI, 91%-95%), and 0.985, respectively. On a lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of F-fluoride PET or PET/CT were 87% (95% CI, 85%-88%), 95% (95% CI, 94%-96%), and 0.979, respectively. When compared with Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy, F-fluoride PET or PET/CT showed both higher sensitivity (96% vs. 88%, P = 0.002) and specificity (91% vs. 80%, P = 0.001). When compared with F-FDG PET/CT, F-fluoride PET/CT showed higher sensitivity (94% vs. 73%, P = 0.003), whereas no significant difference was observed in specificity (88% vs. 98%, P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: F-fluoride PET or PET/CT has an excellent diagnostic capacity for the detection of bone metastases and shows advantages when compared with Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and F-FDG PET/CT.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of F-fluoride PET or PET/CT compared with Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and F-FDG PET/CT in the detection of bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. All analyses were performed on Stata version 12.0 and Meta-DiSc version 1.4. RESULTS: Twenty articles containing 1170 patients were identified. On a patient basis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of F-fluoride PET or PET/CT were 92% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89%-95%), 93% (95% CI, 91%-95%), and 0.985, respectively. On a lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve of F-fluoride PET or PET/CT were 87% (95% CI, 85%-88%), 95% (95% CI, 94%-96%), and 0.979, respectively. When compared with Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy, F-fluoride PET or PET/CT showed both higher sensitivity (96% vs. 88%, P = 0.002) and specificity (91% vs. 80%, P = 0.001). When compared with F-FDG PET/CT, F-fluoride PET/CT showed higher sensitivity (94% vs. 73%, P = 0.003), whereas no significant difference was observed in specificity (88% vs. 98%, P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS:F-fluoride PET or PET/CT has an excellent diagnostic capacity for the detection of bone metastases and shows advantages when compared with Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and F-FDG PET/CT.
Authors: Ida Sonni; Ryogo Minamimoto; Lucia Baratto; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Andreas M Loening; Shreyas S Vasanawala; Andrei Iagaru Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Alvaro A Ordonez; Vincent P DeMarco; Mariah H Klunk; Supriya Pokkali; Sanjay K Jain Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Ilana F Gareen; Bruce E Hillner; Lucy Hanna; Rajesh Makineni; Fenghai Duan; Anthony F Shields; Rathan M Subramaniam; Barry A Siegel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Jeong Won Lee; Yong-Jin Park; Youn Soo Jeon; Ki Hong Kim; Jong Eun Lee; Sung Hoon Hong; Sang Mi Lee; Su Jin Jang Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2020-11
Authors: Małgorzata Solnik; Natalia Paduszyńska; Anna M Czarnecka; Kamil J Synoradzki; Yacoub A Yousef; Tomasz Chorągiewicz; Robert Rejdak; Mario Damiano Toro; Sandrine Zweifel; Katarzyna Dyndor; Michał Fiedorowicz Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Bruce E Hillner; Lucy Hanna; Rajesh Makineni; Fenghai Duan; Anthony F Shields; Rathan M Subramaniam; Ilana Gareen; Barry A Siegel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 10.057