I Binse1, T D Poeppel2, M Ruhlmann2, B Gomez2, L Umutlu3, A Bockisch2, S J Rosenbaum-Krumme2. 1. Medical Faculty, Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany. ina.binse@uk-essen.de. 2. Medical Faculty, Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45122, Essen, Germany. 3. Medical Faculty, Department of Radiology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare integrated PET/CT and PET/MRI for their usefulness in detecting and categorizing cervical iodine-positive lesions in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer using (124)I as tracer. METHODS: The study group comprised 65 patients at high risk of iodine-positive metastasis who underwent PET/CT (low-dose CT scan, PET acquisition time 2 min; PET/CT2) followed by PET/MRI of the neck 24 h after (124)I administration. PET images from both modalities were analysed for the numbers of tracer-positive lesions. Two different acquisition times were used for the comparisons, one matching the PET/CT2 acquisition time (2 min, PET/MRI2) and the other covering the whole MRI scan time (30 min, PET/MRI30). Iodine-positive lesions were categorized as metastasis, thyroid remnant or inconclusive according to their location on the PET/CT images. Morphological information provided by MRI was considered for evaluation of lesions on PET/MRI and for volume information. RESULTS: PET/MRI2 detected significantly more iodine-positive metastases and thyroid remnants than PET/CT2 (72 vs. 60, p = 0.002, and 100 vs. 80, p = 0.001, respectively), but the numbers of patients with at least one tumour lesion identified were not significantly different (21/65 vs. 17/65 patients). PET/MRI30 tended to detect more PET-positive metastases than PET/MRI2 (88 vs. 72), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.07). Of 21 lesions classified as inconclusive on PET/CT, 5 were assigned to metastasis or thyroid remnant when evaluated by PET/MRI. Volume information was available in 34 % of iodine-positive metastases and 2 % of thyroid remnants on PET/MRI. CONCLUSIONS: PET/MRI of the neck was found to be superior to PET/CT in detecting iodine-positive lesions. This was attributed to the higher sensitivity of the PET component, Although helpful in some cases, we found no substantial advantage of PET/MRI over PET/CT in categorizing iodine-positive lesions as either metastasis or thyroid remnant. Volume information provided by MRI for some iodine-positive lesions might be useful in dosimetry.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare integrated PET/CT and PET/MRI for their usefulness in detecting and categorizing cervical iodine-positive lesions in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer using (124)I as tracer. METHODS: The study group comprised 65 patients at high risk of iodine-positive metastasis who underwent PET/CT (low-dose CT scan, PET acquisition time 2 min; PET/CT2) followed by PET/MRI of the neck 24 h after (124)I administration. PET images from both modalities were analysed for the numbers of tracer-positive lesions. Two different acquisition times were used for the comparisons, one matching the PET/CT2 acquisition time (2 min, PET/MRI2) and the other covering the whole MRI scan time (30 min, PET/MRI30). Iodine-positive lesions were categorized as metastasis, thyroid remnant or inconclusive according to their location on the PET/CT images. Morphological information provided by MRI was considered for evaluation of lesions on PET/MRI and for volume information. RESULTS: PET/MRI2 detected significantly more iodine-positive metastases and thyroid remnants than PET/CT2 (72 vs. 60, p = 0.002, and 100 vs. 80, p = 0.001, respectively), but the numbers of patients with at least one tumour lesion identified were not significantly different (21/65 vs. 17/65 patients). PET/MRI30 tended to detect more PET-positive metastases than PET/MRI2 (88 vs. 72), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.07). Of 21 lesions classified as inconclusive on PET/CT, 5 were assigned to metastasis or thyroid remnant when evaluated by PET/MRI. Volume information was available in 34 % of iodine-positive metastases and 2 % of thyroid remnants on PET/MRI. CONCLUSIONS: PET/MRI of the neck was found to be superior to PET/CT in detecting iodine-positive lesions. This was attributed to the higher sensitivity of the PET component, Although helpful in some cases, we found no substantial advantage of PET/MRI over PET/CT in categorizing iodine-positive lesions as either metastasis or thyroid remnant. Volume information provided by MRI for some iodine-positive lesions might be useful in dosimetry.
Authors: Walter Jentzen; Lutz Freudenberg; Ernst G Eising; Wilfried Sonnenschein; Jochen Knust; Andreas Bockisch Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Lutz S Freudenberg; Walter Jentzen; Alexander Stahl; Andreas Bockisch; Sandra J Rosenbaum-Krumme Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-04-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Marco Wiesmüller; Harald H Quick; Bharath Navalpakkam; Michael M Lell; Michael Uder; Philipp Ritt; Daniela Schmidt; Michael Beck; Torsten Kuwert; Carl C von Gall Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-10-06 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gaspar Delso; Sebastian Fürst; Björn Jakoby; Ralf Ladebeck; Carl Ganter; Stephan G Nekolla; Markus Schwaiger; Sibylle I Ziegler Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2011-11-11 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Axel Martinez-Möller; Michael Souvatzoglou; Gaspar Delso; Ralph A Bundschuh; Christophe Chefd'hotel; Sibylle I Ziegler; Nassir Navab; Markus Schwaiger; Stephan G Nekolla Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-03-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Laura Seiboth; Douglas Van Nostrand; Leonard Wartofsky; Yasser Ousman; Jacqueline Jonklaas; Calvin Butler; Frank Atkins; Kenneth Burman Journal: Thyroid Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: Felix P Kuhn; Martin Hüllner; Caecilia E Mader; Nikos Kastrinidis; Gerhard F Huber; Gustav K von Schulthess; Spyros Kollias; Patrick Veit-Haibach Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Hong Grafe; Maike E Lindemann; Manuel Weber; Julian Kirchner; Ina Binse; Lale Umutlu; Ken Herrmann; Harald H Quick Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Johann-Martin Hempel; Roman Kloeckner; Sandra Krick; Daniel Pinto Dos Santos; Simin Schadmand-Fischer; Patrick Boeßert; Sotirios Bisdas; Matthias M Weber; Christian Fottner; Thomas J Musholt; Mathias Schreckenberger; Matthias Miederer Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2016-11-03 Impact factor: 3.909
Authors: D L Bailey; B J Pichler; B Gückel; H Barthel; A J Beer; R Botnar; R Gillies; V Goh; M Gotthardt; R J Hicks; R Lanzenberger; C la Fougere; M Lentschig; S G Nekolla; T Niederdraenk; K Nikolaou; J Nuyts; D Olego; K Åhlström Riklund; A Signore; M Schäfers; V Sossi; M Suminski; P Veit-Haibach; L Umutlu; M Wissmeyer; T Beyer Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Walter Jentzen; Jinda Phaosricharoen; Benedikt Gomez; Philipp Hetkamp; Vanessa Stebner; Ina Binse; Sonja Kinner; Ken Herrmann; Amir Sabet; James Nagarajah Journal: EJNMMI Phys Date: 2018-07-19