AIM: Of the present study was to evaluate 18FDG PET as a diagnostic tool in primary and recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: PET of the abdomen and the pelvis was performed in 26 patients suspected for primary (n = 17) or recurrent (n = 9) ovarian cancer with an ECAT 953/15 scanner 45 min after intravenous administration of 245 MBq 18F-FDG (mean). PET findings were validated by surgery, histology and/or cytology. RESULTS: Ovarian malignancies or recurrent ovarian cancer were demonstrated by PET in 16 out of 19 cases. Malignancy was excluded in six out of seven cases. False negative findings were obtained in two cases of low malignant potential tumors (LMP) and in one case of low grade serous/mucinous ovarian cystadenocarcinoma. PET yielded one false positive result in a case of salpingoophoritis. Quantitative analysis revealed a mean SUV of 6.8 +/- 2.3 in primary ovarian carcinoma vs. 2.6 +/- 1.2 in benign masses (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: These preliminary data show 18FDG PET to be useful in diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer. PET is of limited use in differentiating LMP from benign tumors and ovarian cancer from inflammatory processes. Concerning this differentiation, quantitative analysis does not improve diagnostic accuracy.
AIM: Of the present study was to evaluate 18FDG PET as a diagnostic tool in primary and recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: PET of the abdomen and the pelvis was performed in 26 patients suspected for primary (n = 17) or recurrent (n = 9) ovarian cancer with an ECAT 953/15 scanner 45 min after intravenous administration of 245 MBq 18F-FDG (mean). PET findings were validated by surgery, histology and/or cytology. RESULTS:Ovarian malignancies or recurrent ovarian cancer were demonstrated by PET in 16 out of 19 cases. Malignancy was excluded in six out of seven cases. False negative findings were obtained in two cases of low malignant potential tumors (LMP) and in one case of low grade serous/mucinous ovarian cystadenocarcinoma. PET yielded one false positive result in a case of salpingoophoritis. Quantitative analysis revealed a mean SUV of 6.8 +/- 2.3 in primary ovarian carcinoma vs. 2.6 +/- 1.2 in benign masses (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: These preliminary data show 18FDG PET to be useful in diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer. PET is of limited use in differentiating LMP from benign tumors and ovarian cancer from inflammatory processes. Concerning this differentiation, quantitative analysis does not improve diagnostic accuracy.
Authors: Michael Zimny; Bernd Gagel; Ercole DiMartino; Kurt Hamacher; Heinz H Coenen; Martin Westhofen; Michael Eble; Ulrich Buell; Patrick Reinartz Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-07-14 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Bernd Gagel; Patrick Reinartz; Cengiz Demirel; Hans J Kaiser; Michael Zimny; Marc Piroth; Michael Pinkawa; Sven Stanzel; Branka Asadpour; Kurt Hamacher; Heinz H Coenen; Ulrich Buell; Michael J Eble Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2006-03-04 Impact factor: 4.430