| Literature DB >> 27256176 |
Mete Uttam1, Nayak Pravin1, Bhattacharya Anish2, Kakkar Nandita3, Mandal Arup1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the use of [F-18]-FDG-PET/CT can accurately predict pelvic lymph node metastasis in patients with muscle invasive TCC of the bladder undergoing radical cystectomy.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27256176 PMCID: PMC4871382 DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0579
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Braz J Urol ISSN: 1677-5538 Impact factor: 1.541
Figure 1CT showing enhancing soft tissue lesion in the urinary bladder suggesting neoplastic lesion.
Figure 2CT showing enlarged lymph node in the pelvis.
Figure 3Histopathology showing lymph node metastasis h&E X 20.
CT and PET-CT accuracy for lymph nodes.
| Histopathology of Lymph Nodes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gold standard Positive | Gold standard Negative | |||
| CT |
|
|
| → PPV = TP / (TP + FP) = 3 / (3 + 6) =3/9 |
|
|
|
| → NPV = TN / (FN + TN) = 6 / (0+ 6) = 6/6 | |
| ↓ Sensitivity = TP / (TP + FN) = 3 / (3 + 0) = 3/3 | ↓ Specificity = TN / (FP + TN) = 6/ (6 + 6) = 6/12 | |||
| PET-CT |
|
|
| → PPV = TP / (TP + FP) = 3 /(3 + 5) = 3/8 |
|
|
|
| → NPV = TN / (FN + N) = 7 / (0+ 7)= 7/7 | |
| ↓ Sensitivity = TP / (TP + FN) = 3 /(3 + 0)= 3/3 | ↓ Specificity = TN /(FP + TN) = 7 /(5 +7)= 7/12 | |||
TP = true positive; TN = true negative; FP = false positive; FN = false negative; PPV = positive predictive value; NPV = negative predictive value; PET = positron emission tomography; CT = computed tomography
Comparison of PET/CT versus CT in terms of nodal detection.
| Parameters (%) | PET/CT | CT |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 100 | 100 |
| Specificity | 58.3 | 50.0 |
| PPV | 37.5 | 33.5 |
| NPV | 100 | 100 |
Figure 4High FDG uptake is seen in soft tissue mass in the bladder suggestive of primary lesion.
Figure 5PET / CT showing moderate FDG uptake in left internal iliac nodes (arrow).
Contemporary series on role of PET/CT for pelvic nodal staging.
| Authors | PET Tracer | Number of pts | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drieskens et al. ( | 18F-FDG | 55 | 60 | 88 |
| Goodfellow H et al. ( | 18F-FDG | 233 | 69 | 95 |
| Liu et al. ( | 18F-FDG | 46 | 76.9 | 97.1 |
| Li et al. ( | 18F-FDG | 73 | 75 | - |
| Gofrit et al. ( | 11C-choline | 18 | 100 | - |
| Picchio M et al. ( | 11C-choline | 27 | 62 | |
| Current study | 18F-FDG | 15 | 100 | 58.3 |