Sun-Young Park1,2, Hye Won Chung3, Sun Young Chae4, Jong-Seok Lee5. 1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Gwanpyeong-ro 170 beon-gil, Dongan-gu, Anyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, 14068, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea. chung@amc.seoul.kr. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea. 5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic performance of MRI and PET-CT for the detection of loco-regional recurrences after soft tissue sarcoma (STS) excision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From Dec 2003 to Aug 2014, 394 patients with STSs, who were included in the electronic patient registry for initial or repeated surgery at our hospital, were retrospectively reviewed. We identified 152 patients who underwent regular postoperative follow-ups with both MRI and PET-CT, obtained within a 3 month period of each other. We analyzed differences in the performance of MRI and PET-CT for the diagnosis of loco-regional recurrences using McNemar's test. The receiver-operating characteristic curves and calculations of the area under the curve were used. RESULTS: Twenty patients were found to have a loco-regional recurrence after tumor excision. For MRI and PET-CT, the sensitivities were 90.0 and 95.0 %, and the specificities 97.7 and 95.5 %, respectively, with positive predictive values of 85.7 and 76.0 % and negative predictive values of 98.5 and 99.2 %, respectively. No significant difference was detected between the sensitivities of MRI and PET-CT (p = 0.125). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for PET-CT (0.952) was not significantly greater than that for MRI (0.939; p = 0.6). CONCLUSION: MRI of the area of interest is recommended for evaluation of tumor recurrence after surgical excision of STS. PET-CT was shown to be effective for detection of STS recurrence, and comparable to MRI. However, if PET-CT or MRI findings are inconclusive, the other modality may be helpful in differentiating tumor recurrence from post-therapeutic tissue change.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic performance of MRI and PET-CT for the detection of loco-regional recurrences after soft tissue sarcoma (STS) excision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From Dec 2003 to Aug 2014, 394 patients with STSs, who were included in the electronic patient registry for initial or repeated surgery at our hospital, were retrospectively reviewed. We identified 152 patients who underwent regular postoperative follow-ups with both MRI and PET-CT, obtained within a 3 month period of each other. We analyzed differences in the performance of MRI and PET-CT for the diagnosis of loco-regional recurrences using McNemar's test. The receiver-operating characteristic curves and calculations of the area under the curve were used. RESULTS: Twenty patients were found to have a loco-regional recurrence after tumor excision. For MRI and PET-CT, the sensitivities were 90.0 and 95.0 %, and the specificities 97.7 and 95.5 %, respectively, with positive predictive values of 85.7 and 76.0 % and negative predictive values of 98.5 and 99.2 %, respectively. No significant difference was detected between the sensitivities of MRI and PET-CT (p = 0.125). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for PET-CT (0.952) was not significantly greater than that for MRI (0.939; p = 0.6). CONCLUSION: MRI of the area of interest is recommended for evaluation of tumor recurrence after surgical excision of STS. PET-CT was shown to be effective for detection of STS recurrence, and comparable to MRI. However, if PET-CT or MRI findings are inconclusive, the other modality may be helpful in differentiating tumor recurrence from post-therapeutic tissue change.
Authors: D Labarre; R Aziza; T Filleron; M Delannes; F Delaunay; B Marques; G Ferron; C Chevreau Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2009-09-09 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Alberto Tagliafico; Mauro Truini; Bruno Spina; Paolo Cambiaso; Federico Zaottini; Bianca Bignotti; Massimo Calabrese; Lorenzo E Derchi; Carlo Martinoli Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-03-21 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andrei Iagaru; Rinat Masamed; Sant P Chawla; Lawrence R Menendez; Alex Fedenko; Peter S Conti Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: C Rothermundt; J S Whelan; P Dileo; S J Strauss; J Coleman; T W Briggs; S R Haile; B M Seddon Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Youssef Erfanian; Johannes Grueneisen; Julian Kirchner; Axel Wetter; Lars Erik Podleska; Sebastian Bauer; Thorsten Poeppel; Michael Forsting; Ken Herrmann; Lale Umutlu Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-05-31 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Daniel Kraus; Felix Oettinger; Jurij Kiefer; Holger Bannasch; G Björn Stark; Filip Simunovic Journal: J Oncol Date: 2021-04-27 Impact factor: 4.375
Authors: Maria Chara Stylianidi; Lena Haeberle; Matthias Schott; Yuriko Mori; Christina Antke; Frederick Lars Giesel; Gerald Antoch; Irene Esposito; Wolfram Trudo Knoefel; Andreas Krieg Journal: Surg Case Rep Date: 2022-07-25