Kazuhiro Kitajima1, Shingo Yamamoto2, Yusuke Kawanaka3, Takayuki Katsuura4, Masahiro Fujita4, Yukako Nakanishi2, Yusuke Yamada2, Takahiko Hashimoto2, Toru Suzuki2, Shuken Go2, Akihiro Kanematsu2, Michio Nojima2, Koichiro Yamakado3. 1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, PET Center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, 663-8501, Japan. kitajima@med.kobe-u.ac.jp. 2. Department of Urology, Kidney Transplant Center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, 663-8501, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, 663-8501, Japan. 4. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, PET Center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, 663-8501, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate renal cell carcinoma (RCC) findings in acquired cystic disease of the kidney (ACDK) shown by 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT, and contrast-enhanced CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six ACDK patients with 7 RCCs underwent 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT, and contrast-enhanced CT before nephrectomy. Findings obtained with 3 imagings were evaluated and sensitivity detecting RCC was compared using 3-point grading scale (negative, equivocal, positive). The equivocal scale used for SUVmax ranged from 2.0 to 3.0 for PET/CT and a peak enhancement value ranging from 20 to 30 HU was used for CT. RESULT: The histopathologic subtypes of 7 RCCs were clear-cell (n = 4) and ACD-associated RCC (n = 3). The negative/equivocal/positive grading results were 0/0/7 for 11C-choline-PET/CT, 0/3/4 for FDG-PET/CT, and 2/2/3 for CT. Three equivocal cases by FDG-PET/CT were 2 clear-cell RCCs and 1 ACD-associated RCC. CT of 3 ACD-associated RCCs showed negativity for 2 and equivocality for 1. Sensitivity defining equivocal interpretation as negative for 11C-choline-PET/CT, FDG-PET/CT, and CT was 100% (7/7), 57.1% (4/7), and 42.9% (3/7). CONCLUSION: 11C-choline-PET/CT was more sensitive to detect RCC in ACDK as compared to FDG-PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT in our series. FDG-PET/CT may be limited for detecting clear-cell RCC, while CT may have difficulty with detection of ACD-associated RCC.
PURPOSE: To evaluate renal cell carcinoma (RCC) findings in acquired cystic disease of the kidney (ACDK) shown by 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT, and contrast-enhanced CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six ACDK patients with 7 RCCs underwent 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT, and contrast-enhanced CT before nephrectomy. Findings obtained with 3 imagings were evaluated and sensitivity detecting RCC was compared using 3-point grading scale (negative, equivocal, positive). The equivocal scale used for SUVmax ranged from 2.0 to 3.0 for PET/CT and a peak enhancement value ranging from 20 to 30 HU was used for CT. RESULT: The histopathologic subtypes of 7 RCCs were clear-cell (n = 4) and ACD-associated RCC (n = 3). The negative/equivocal/positive grading results were 0/0/7 for 11C-choline-PET/CT, 0/3/4 for FDG-PET/CT, and 2/2/3 for CT. Three equivocal cases by FDG-PET/CT were 2 clear-cell RCCs and 1 ACD-associated RCC. CT of 3 ACD-associated RCCs showed negativity for 2 and equivocality for 1. Sensitivity defining equivocal interpretation as negative for 11C-choline-PET/CT, FDG-PET/CT, and CT was 100% (7/7), 57.1% (4/7), and 42.9% (3/7). CONCLUSION:11C-choline-PET/CT was more sensitive to detect RCC in ACDK as compared to FDG-PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT in our series. FDG-PET/CT may be limited for detecting clear-cell RCC, while CT may have difficulty with detection of ACD-associated RCC.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acquired cystic disease of the kidney (ACDK); Choline; Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG); Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT); Renal cell carcinoma (RCC)