Benedikt Michael Schaarschmidt1,2, Philipp Heusch3, Christian Buchbender3, Marcus Ruhlmann4, Christoph Bergmann5, Verena Ruhlmann4, Marc Schlamann6,7, Gerald Antoch3, Michael Forsting6, Axel Wetter6. 1. Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Dusseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany. Benedikt.Schaarschmidt@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 2. Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Duisburg-Essen, 45147, Essen, Germany. Benedikt.Schaarschmidt@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 3. Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Dusseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany. 4. Medical Faculty, Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Duisburg-Essen, 45147, Essen, Germany. 5. Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Essen, 45147, Essen, Germany. 6. Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Duisburg-Essen, 45147, Essen, Germany. 7. Department of Neuroradiology, University Hospital Giessen, Marburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of integrated (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging for locoregional tumour evaluation compared to (18)F-FDG PET/CT and MR imaging in initial tumour and recurrence diagnosis in histopathologically confirmed head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: (18)F-FDG PET/CT and integrated (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging were performed for initial tumour staging or recurrence diagnosis in 25 patients with HNSCC. MR, fused (18)F-FDG PET/CT and fused (18)F-FDG PET/MR images were analysed by two independent readers in separate sessions in random order. In initial tumour staging, T and N staging was performed while individual lesions were analysed in patients with suspected cancer recurrence. In T and N staging, histopathological results after tumour resection served as the reference standard while histopathological sampling as well as cross-sectional and clinical follow-up were accepted in cancer recurrence diagnosis. The diagnostic accuracy of each modality was calculated separately for T and N staging as well as for tumour recurrence, and compared using McNemar's test. Values of p <0.017 were considered statistically significant after Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: In 12 patients undergoing (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR for initial tumour staging, T staging was accurate in 50 % with MRI, in 59 % with PET/CT and in 75 % with PET/MR while N staging was accurate in 75 % with MRI, in 77 % with PET/CT and in 71 % with PET/MR in relation to the reference standard. No significant differences were observed in T and N staging among the three modalities (p > 0.017). In 13 patients undergoing hybrid imaging for cancer recurrence diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy was 57 % with MRI and in 72 % with (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR, respectively. Again, no significant differences were found among the three modalities (p > 0.017). CONCLUSION: In this initial study, no significant differences were found among (18)F-FDG PET/MR, (18)F-FDG PET/CT and MRI in local tumour staging and cancer recurrence diagnosis.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of integrated (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging for locoregional tumour evaluation compared to (18)F-FDG PET/CT and MR imaging in initial tumour and recurrence diagnosis in histopathologically confirmed head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: (18)F-FDG PET/CT and integrated (18)F-FDG PET/MR imaging were performed for initial tumour staging or recurrence diagnosis in 25 patients with HNSCC. MR, fused (18)F-FDG PET/CT and fused (18)F-FDG PET/MR images were analysed by two independent readers in separate sessions in random order. In initial tumour staging, T and N staging was performed while individual lesions were analysed in patients with suspected cancer recurrence. In T and N staging, histopathological results after tumour resection served as the reference standard while histopathological sampling as well as cross-sectional and clinical follow-up were accepted in cancer recurrence diagnosis. The diagnostic accuracy of each modality was calculated separately for T and N staging as well as for tumour recurrence, and compared using McNemar's test. Values of p <0.017 were considered statistically significant after Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: In 12 patients undergoing (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR for initial tumour staging, T staging was accurate in 50 % with MRI, in 59 % with PET/CT and in 75 % with PET/MR while N staging was accurate in 75 % with MRI, in 77 % with PET/CT and in 71 % with PET/MR in relation to the reference standard. No significant differences were observed in T and N staging among the three modalities (p > 0.017). In 13 patients undergoing hybrid imaging for cancer recurrence diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy was 57 % with MRI and in 72 % with (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR, respectively. Again, no significant differences were found among the three modalities (p > 0.017). CONCLUSION: In this initial study, no significant differences were found among (18)F-FDG PET/MR, (18)F-FDG PET/CT and MRI in local tumour staging and cancer recurrence diagnosis.
Entities:
Keywords:
HNSCC; Head and neck; MRI; PET/CT; PET/MR; PET/MRI
Authors: Mark Oehmigen; Susanne Ziegler; Bjoern W Jakoby; Jens-Christoph Georgi; Daniel H Paulus; Harald H Quick Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: R Sigal; A M Zagdanski; G Schwaab; J Bosq; A Auperin; A Laplanche; J P Francke; F Eschwège; B Luboinski; D Vanel Journal: Radiographics Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Fabio M Paes; Adam D Singer; Adam N Checkver; Ricardo A Palmquist; Gabriela De La Vega; Charif Sidani Journal: Radiographics Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Mark K Wax; Larry L Myers; Jayakumari M Gona; Syed S Husain; Hani A Nabi Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Fulvio Zaccagna; James T Grist; Surrin S Deen; Ramona Woitek; Laura Mt Lechermann; Mary A McLean; Bristi Basu; Ferdia A Gallagher Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 3.039