Literature DB >> 9144856

Oncologic imaging: interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI using the bone scan as a model.

E W Tryciecky1, A Gottschalk, K Ludema.   

Abstract

There are many radionuclides currently used in oncologic imaging including technetium 99m diphosphonates, gallium 67, thallium 201, technetium 99m sestamibi, and others. The specific interactions of each of these agents with computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are extensive. The radionuclide bone scan using 99mTc diphosphonate is the most frequently performed nuclear medicine examination in oncologic imaging. The bone scan can be used as a model to generalize the interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI. The applications for the bone scan and many other nuclear medicine procedures in oncologic imaging include evaluating for metastases, assessing the response to therapy, and guiding radiation therapy planning. Bone scan findings that are equivocal for metastases can be evaluated with other imaging modalities. Areas of abnormal uptake in the axial skeleton can be evaluated with CT or MRI, whereas those in the appendicular skeleton can be evaluated with plain radiographs, followed by CT or MRI if necessary. The bone scan is valuable in oncologic imaging because of its high sensitivity for lesion detection, its ease in whole body imaging, and its low cost. The major disadvantage of the bone scan is that it lacks fine anatomic detail, which is of particular importance in the cancer patient with local back pain, radiculopathy, or myelopathy. Because local back pain with or without radiculopathy is the earliest symptom of spinal cord compression in 90% of patients, an MRI is the study of choice because of its exquisite depiction of anatomy. A myelogram followed by a postmyelogram CT can be performed if there are contraindications to an MRI. The basic principle of high sensitivity for lesion detection and ease in whole body imaging provided by nuclear medicine and fine anatomic detail provided by CT and MRI can be applied also to the use of other radionuclides in oncologic imaging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9144856     DOI: 10.1016/s0001-2998(97)80044-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Semin Nucl Med        ISSN: 0001-2998            Impact factor:   4.446


  10 in total

1.  Maintaining bone health in patients with multiple myeloma: survivorship care plan of the International Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership Board.

Authors:  Teresa S Miceli; Kathleen Colson; Beth M Faiman; Kena Miller; Joseph D Tariman
Journal:  Clin J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.027

Review 2.  Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy.

Authors:  Hui-Lin Yang; Tao Liu; Xi-Ming Wang; Yong Xu; Sheng-Ming Deng
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Detection of vertebral metastases: a meta-analysis comparing MRI, CT, PET, BS and BS with SPECT.

Authors:  Tao Liu; Shenghao Wang; Hao Liu; Bin Meng; Feng Zhou; Fan He; Xiaojian Shi; Huilin Yang
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 4.553

4.  Differentiation of metastatic vs degenerative joint disease using semi-quantitative analysis with (18)F-NaF PET/CT in castrate resistant prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Saima Muzahir; Robert Jeraj; Glenn Liu; Lance T Hall; Alejandro Munoz Del Rio; Timothy Perk; Christine Jaskowiak; Scott B Perlman
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-01-15

Review 5.  Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Guohua Shen; Houfu Deng; Shuang Hu; Zhiyun Jia
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 6.  A meta-analysis of 18FDG-PET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  Tao Liu; Tao Cheng; Wen Xu; Wei-Li Yan; Jia Liu; Hui-Lin Yang
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2010-05-22       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretations--a nationwide survey.

Authors:  May Sadik; Madis Suurkula; Peter Höglund; Andreas Järund; Lars Edenbrandt
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-03-29       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 8.  Measuring the unmeasurable: automated bone scan index as a quantitative endpoint in prostate cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Jose Mauricio Mota; Andrew J Armstrong; Steven M Larson; Josef J Fox; Michael J Morris
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 5.554

9.  Is there any significance of lung cancer histology to compare the diagnostic accuracies of (18)F-FDG-PET/CT and (99m)Tc-MDP BS for the detection of bone metastases in advanced NSCLC?

Authors:  Ali Inal; Muhammed Ali Kaplan; Mehmet Kucukoner; Zuhat Urakcı; Zeki Dostbil; Hail Komek; Hakan Onder; Bekir Tasdemir; Abdurrahman Isıkdogan
Journal:  Contemp Oncol (Pozn)       Date:  2014-06-03

10.  Bone metastases from breast cancer: associations between morphologic CT patterns and glycolytic activity on PET and bone scintigraphy as well as explorative search for influential factors.

Authors:  Tsutomu Sugihara; Mitsuru Koizumi; Masamichi Koyama; Takashi Terauchi; Naoya Gomi; Yoshinori Ito; Kiyohiko Hatake; Naohiro Sata
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 2.668

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.