Literature DB >> 26676720

Comparison of integrated whole-body PET/MR and PET/CT: Is PET/MR alternative to PET/CT in routine clinical oncology?

Shirou Ishii1, Daisuke Shimao2, Takamitsu Hara3, Masayuki Miyajima4, Ken Kikuchi4, Masashi Takawa5, Kensuke Kumamoto5, Hiroshi Ito3, Fumio Shishido4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of whole-body PET/CT and integrated PET/MR in relation to the total scan time durations.
METHODS: One hundred and twenty-three (123) patients (40 males and 83 females; mean age 59.6 years; range 20-83 years) with confirmed primary cancer and clinical suspicion of metastatic disease underwent whole-body 18F-FDG-PET/CT and 18F-FDG-PET/MR. Data acquisition was done after intravenous administration of 110-301 MBq radioactivity of 18F-FDG, and PET/MR data were acquired after the PET/CT data acquisition. The mean uptake times for PET/CT and PET/MR acquisition were 68.0 ± 8.0 and 98.0 ± 14 min, respectively. Total scan time was 20.0 and 25.0 min for whole-body PET/CT and PET/MR imaging.
RESULTS: The reconstructed PET/CT and PET/MR data detected 333/355 (93.8 %) common lesions in 111/123 (90.2 %) patients. PET/CT and PET/MR alone detected 348/355 and 340/355 lesions, respectively. No significant (p = 0.08) difference was observed for the overall detection efficiency between the two techniques. On the other hand, a significant difference was observed between the two techniques for the detection of lung (p = 0.003) and cerebrospinal (p = 0.007) lesions. The 15 lesions identified by PET/CT only included 8 lung, 3 lymph nodes, 2 bone, and 1 each of peritoneal and adrenal gland lesions. On the other hand, 7 (6 brain metastatic lesions and 1 bone lesion) were identified by PET/MR only.
CONCLUSION: Integrated PET/MR is a feasible whole-body imaging modality and may score better than PET/CT for the detection of brain metastases. To further prove diagnostic utility, this technique requires further clinical validation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lesion detectability; Oncology; PET/CT; PET/MR; Whole-body

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26676720     DOI: 10.1007/s12149-015-1050-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Nucl Med        ISSN: 0914-7187            Impact factor:   2.668


  9 in total

Review 1.  Clinical pediatric positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance program: a guide to successful implementation.

Authors:  Sandra Saade-Lemus; Elad Nevo; Iman Soliman; Hansel J Otero; Ralph W Magee; Elizabeth T Drum; Lisa J States
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2020-02-19

Review 2.  Highlights of articles published in annals of nuclear medicine 2016.

Authors:  Hossein Jadvar
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-07-28       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Optimized workflow and imaging protocols for whole-body oncologic PET/MRI.

Authors:  Shirou Ishii; Takamitsu Hara; Takeyuki Nanbu; Hiroki Suenaga; Shigeyasu Sugawara; Daichi Kuroiwa; Hirofumi Sekino; Masayuki Miyajima; Hitoshi Kubo; Noboru Oriuchi; Hiroshi Ito
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Applying Amide Proton Transfer MR Imaging to Hybrid Brain PET/MR: Concordance with Gadolinium Enhancement and Added Value to [18F]FDG PET.

Authors:  Hongzan Sun; Jun Xin; Jinyuan Zhou; Zaiming Lu; Qiyong Guo
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  PET/MRI versus PET/CT in oncology: a prospective single-center study of 330 examinations focusing on implications for patient management and cost considerations.

Authors:  Marius E Mayerhoefer; Helmut Prosch; Lucian Beer; Dietmar Tamandl; Thomas Beyer; Christoph Hoeller; Dominik Berzaczy; Markus Raderer; Matthias Preusser; Maximilian Hochmair; Barbara Kiesewetter; Christian Scheuba; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Georgios Karanikas; Julia Kesselbacher; Gerald Prager; Karin Dieckmann; Stephan Polterauer; Michael Weber; Ivo Rausch; Bernhard Brauner; Harald Eidherr; Wolfgang Wadsak; Alexander R Haug
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 6.  Comparison of 68Ga-labeled Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Primary Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sui Wai Ling; Anouk C de Jong; Ivo G Schoots; Kazem Nasserinejad; Martijn B Busstra; Astrid A M van der Veldt; Tessa Brabander
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-09-28

Review 7.  Update on the Use of PET/MRI Contrast Agents and Tracers in Brain Oncology: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alessio Smeraldo; Alfonso Maria Ponsiglione; Andrea Soricelli; Paolo Antonio Netti; Enza Torino
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2022-07-29

Review 8.  Application of Multimodality Imaging Fusion Technology in Diagnosis and Treatment of Malignant Tumors under the Precision Medicine Plan.

Authors:  Shun-Yi Wang; Xian-Xia Chen; Yi Li; Yu-Ying Zhang
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 2.628

9.  Improving MR sequence of 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosing and staging gastric Cancer: a comparison study to 18F-FDG PET/CT.

Authors:  Dong Zheng; Yi Liu; Jiajin Liu; Ke Li; Mu Lin; Holger Schmidt; Baixuan Xu; Jiahe Tian
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 3.909

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.