Cinzia Crivellaro1,2, Elena De Ponti3, Federica Elisei4, Sabrina Morzenti3, Maria Picchio5, Valentino Bettinardi5, Annibale Versari6, Federica Fioroni7, Miroslaw Dziuk8, Konrad Tkaczewski8, Renée Ahond-Vionnet9, Guillaume Nodari9, Sergio Todde10, Claudio Landoni4,11, Luca Guerra4,11. 1. Nuclear Medicine, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy. cinzia.crivellaro@unimib.it. 2. University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy. cinzia.crivellaro@unimib.it. 3. Medical Physics, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy. 4. Nuclear Medicine, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy. 5. Nuclear Medicine, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. 6. Nuclear Medicine, Santa Maria Nuova Hospital IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy. 7. Medical Physics, Santa Maria Nuova Hospital IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy. 8. Military Institute of Medicine, Warsaw, Poland. 9. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, Hôpital Pierre Beregovoy, Cedex, Nevers, France. 10. Tecnomed Foundation, University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy. 11. University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the added diagnostic value of respiratory-gated 4D18F-FDG PET/CT in liver lesion detection and characterization in a European multicenter retrospective study. METHODS: Fifty-six oncological patients (29 males and 27 females, mean age, 61.2 ± 11.2 years) from five European centers, submitted to standard 3D-PET/CT and liver 4D-PET/CT were retrospectively evaluated. Based on visual analysis, liver PET/CT findings were scored as positive, negative, or equivocal both in 3D and 4D PET/CT. The impact of 4D-PET/CT on the confidence in classifying liver lesions was assessed. PET/CT findings were compared to histology and clinical follow-up as standard reference and diagnostic accuracy was calculated for both techniques. At semi-quantitative analysis, SUVmax was calculated for each detected lesion in 3D and 4D-PET/CT. RESULTS: Overall, 72 liver lesions were considered for the analysis. Based on visual analysis in 3D-PET/CT, 32/72 (44.4%) lesions were considered positive, 21/72 (29.2%) negative, and 19/72 (26.4%) equivocal, while in 4D-PET/CT 48/72 (66.7%) lesions were defined positive, 23/72 (31.9%) negative, and 1/72 (1.4%) equivocal. 4D-PET/CT findings increased the confidence in lesion definition in 37/72 lesions (51.4%). Considering 3D equivocal lesions as positive, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88.9, 70.0, and 83.1%, respectively, while the same figures were 67.7, 90.0, and 73.8% if 3D equivocal findings were included as negative. 4D-PET/CT sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 97.8, 90.0, and 95.4%, respectively, considering equivocal lesions as positive and 95.6, 90.0, and 93.8% considering equivocal lesions as negative. The SUVmax of the liver lesions in 4D-PET (mean ± SD, 6.9 ± 3.2) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than SUVmax in 3D-PET (mean ± SD, 5.2 ± 2.3). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory-gated PET/CT technique is a valuable clinical tool in diagnosing liver lesions, reducing 3D undetermined findings, improving diagnostic accuracy, and confidence in reporting. 4D-PET/CT also improved the quantification of SUVmax of liver lesions.
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the added diagnostic value of respiratory-gated 4D18F-FDG PET/CT in liver lesion detection and characterization in a European multicenter retrospective study. METHODS: Fifty-six oncological patients (29 males and 27 females, mean age, 61.2 ± 11.2 years) from five European centers, submitted to standard 3D-PET/CT and liver 4D-PET/CT were retrospectively evaluated. Based on visual analysis, liver PET/CT findings were scored as positive, negative, or equivocal both in 3D and 4D PET/CT. The impact of 4D-PET/CT on the confidence in classifying liver lesions was assessed. PET/CT findings were compared to histology and clinical follow-up as standard reference and diagnostic accuracy was calculated for both techniques. At semi-quantitative analysis, SUVmax was calculated for each detected lesion in 3D and 4D-PET/CT. RESULTS: Overall, 72 liver lesions were considered for the analysis. Based on visual analysis in 3D-PET/CT, 32/72 (44.4%) lesions were considered positive, 21/72 (29.2%) negative, and 19/72 (26.4%) equivocal, while in 4D-PET/CT 48/72 (66.7%) lesions were defined positive, 23/72 (31.9%) negative, and 1/72 (1.4%) equivocal. 4D-PET/CT findings increased the confidence in lesion definition in 37/72 lesions (51.4%). Considering 3D equivocal lesions as positive, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88.9, 70.0, and 83.1%, respectively, while the same figures were 67.7, 90.0, and 73.8% if 3D equivocal findings were included as negative. 4D-PET/CT sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 97.8, 90.0, and 95.4%, respectively, considering equivocal lesions as positive and 95.6, 90.0, and 93.8% considering equivocal lesions as negative. The SUVmax of the liver lesions in 4D-PET (mean ± SD, 6.9 ± 3.2) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) than SUVmax in 3D-PET (mean ± SD, 5.2 ± 2.3). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory-gated PET/CT technique is a valuable clinical tool in diagnosing liver lesions, reducing 3D undetermined findings, improving diagnostic accuracy, and confidence in reporting. 4D-PET/CT also improved the quantification of SUVmax of liver lesions.
Authors: Medhat M Osman; Christian Cohade; Yuji Nakamoto; Laura T Marshall; Jeff P Leal; Richard L Wahl Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Wouter V Vogel; Jorn A van Dalen; Bas Wiering; Henkjan Huisman; Frans H M Corstens; Theo J M Ruers; Wim J G Oyen Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Matthias K Werner; J Anthony Parker; Gerald M Kolodny; Jeffrey R English; Matthew R Palmer Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Andrea Lupi; Marta Zaroccolo; Matteo Salgarello; Veronica Malfatti; Pierluigi Zanco Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2009-02-19 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: Michael Messerli; Virginia Liberini; Hannes Grünig; Alexander Maurer; Stephan Skawran; Niklas Lohaus; Lars Husmann; Erika Orita; Josephine Trinckauf; Philipp A Kaufmann; Martin W Huellner Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-09-14 Impact factor: 3.629
Authors: Francine E M Voncken; Erik Vegt; Johanna W van Sandick; Jolanda M van Dieren; Cecile Grootscholten; Annemarieke Bartels-Rutten; Steven L Takken; Jan-Jakob Sonke; Jeroen B van de Kamer; Berthe M P Aleman Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 3.621