Johannes Grueneisen1, Benedikt Michael Schaarschmidt2, Martin Heubner3, Saravanabavaan Suntharalingam4, Ines Milk4, Sonja Kinner4, Antonia Heubner3, Michael Forsting4, Thomas Lauenstein4, Verena Ruhlmann5, Lale Umutlu4. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, D-45147 Essen, Germany. Electronic address: Johannes.grueneisen@uk-essen.de. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Dusseldorf, University of Dusseldorf, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, D-45147 Essen, Germany. 4. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, D-45147 Essen, Germany. 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, D-45147 Essen, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic competence of FAST-PET/MRI and PET/CT for whole-body staging of female patients suspect for a recurrence of a pelvic malignancy. METHODS: 24 female patients with a suspected tumor recurrence underwent a PET/CT and subsequent PET/MRI examination. For PET/MRI readings a whole-body FAST-protocol was implemented. Two readers separately evaluated the PET/CT and FAST PET/MRI datasets regarding identification of all tumor lesions and qualitative assessment of visual lesion-to-background contrast (4-point ordinal scale). RESULTS: Tumor relapse was present in 21 of the 24 patients. Both, PET/CT and PET/MRI allowed for correct identification of tumor recurrence in 20 of 21 cases. Lesion-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of malignant lesions were 82%, 91%, 97%, 58% and 84% for PET/CT and 85%, 87%, 96%, 63% and 86% for PET/MRI, lacking significant differences. Furthermore, no significant difference for lesion-to-background contrast of malignant and benign lesions was found. CONCLUSION: FAST-PET/MRI provides a comparably high diagnostic performance for restaging gynecological cancer patients compared to PET/CT with slightly prolonged scan duration, yet enabling a markedly reduced radiation exposure.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic competence of FAST-PET/MRI and PET/CT for whole-body staging of female patients suspect for a recurrence of a pelvic malignancy. METHODS: 24 female patients with a suspected tumor recurrence underwent a PET/CT and subsequent PET/MRI examination. For PET/MRI readings a whole-body FAST-protocol was implemented. Two readers separately evaluated the PET/CT and FAST PET/MRI datasets regarding identification of all tumor lesions and qualitative assessment of visual lesion-to-background contrast (4-point ordinal scale). RESULTS:Tumor relapse was present in 21 of the 24 patients. Both, PET/CT and PET/MRI allowed for correct identification of tumor recurrence in 20 of 21 cases. Lesion-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of malignant lesions were 82%, 91%, 97%, 58% and 84% for PET/CT and 85%, 87%, 96%, 63% and 86% for PET/MRI, lacking significant differences. Furthermore, no significant difference for lesion-to-background contrast of malignant and benign lesions was found. CONCLUSION: FAST-PET/MRI provides a comparably high diagnostic performance for restaging gynecological cancerpatients compared to PET/CT with slightly prolonged scan duration, yet enabling a markedly reduced radiation exposure.
Authors: Lino M Sawicki; Cornelius Deuschl; Karsten Beiderwellen; Verena Ruhlmann; Thorsten D Poeppel; Philipp Heusch; Harald Lahner; Dagmar Führer; Andreas Bockisch; Ken Herrmann; Michael Forsting; Gerald Antoch; Lale Umutlu Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 5.315
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: Eric C Ehman; Geoffrey B Johnson; Javier E Villanueva-Meyer; Soonmee Cha; Andrew Palmera Leynes; Peder Eric Zufall Larson; Thomas A Hope Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Julian Kirchner; Cornelius Deuschl; Johannes Grueneisen; Ken Herrmann; Michael Forsting; Philipp Heusch; Gerald Antoch; Lale Umutlu Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-02-04 Impact factor: 9.236