PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) in patients with primary colorectal carcinomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients with biopsy-proved (n = 44) or high clinical suspicion for (n = 4) colorectal cancer underwent whole-body PET after intravenous administration of 10 mCi (370 MBq) of FDG. FDG PET results were correlated with computed tomographic (CT), surgical, and histopathologic findings. RESULTS: PET depicted all known intraluminal carcinomas in 37 patients (including two in situ carcinomas) (sensitivity, 100%), but findings were false-positive in four of seven patients without cancer (three with inflammatory bowel conditions, one who had undergone polypectomy). Specificity was 43% (three of seven patients); positive predictive value, 90% (37 of 41 patients); and negative predictive value, 100% (three of three patients). No FDG accumulation was noted in 35 hyperplastic polyps. FDG PET depicted lymph node metastases in four of 14 patients (sensitivity, 29%). Results were similar to those obtained with CT (true-positive, two of seven patients [sensitivity, 29%]; true-negative, 22 of 26 patients [specificity, 85%]). FDG PET depicted liver metastases in seven of eight patients and was superior to CT, which depicted liver metastases in three patients (sensitivity of 88% and 38%, respectively). FDG PET and CT, respectively, correctly depicted the absence of liver metastases in 35 and 32 patients (specificity, 100% and 97%; negative predictive value, 97% and 86%). CONCLUSION: FDG PET has a high sensitivity and specificity for detection of colorectal carcinomas (primary and liver metastases) and appears to be superior to CT in the staging of primary colorectal carcinoma.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) in patients with primary colorectal carcinomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight patients with biopsy-proved (n = 44) or high clinical suspicion for (n = 4) colorectal cancer underwent whole-body PET after intravenous administration of 10 mCi (370 MBq) of FDG. FDG PET results were correlated with computed tomographic (CT), surgical, and histopathologic findings. RESULTS: PET depicted all known intraluminal carcinomas in 37 patients (including two in situ carcinomas) (sensitivity, 100%), but findings were false-positive in four of seven patients without cancer (three with inflammatory bowel conditions, one who had undergone polypectomy). Specificity was 43% (three of seven patients); positive predictive value, 90% (37 of 41 patients); and negative predictive value, 100% (three of three patients). No FDG accumulation was noted in 35 hyperplastic polyps. FDG PET depicted lymph node metastases in four of 14 patients (sensitivity, 29%). Results were similar to those obtained with CT (true-positive, two of seven patients [sensitivity, 29%]; true-negative, 22 of 26 patients [specificity, 85%]). FDG PET depicted liver metastases in seven of eight patients and was superior to CT, which depicted liver metastases in three patients (sensitivity of 88% and 38%, respectively). FDG PET and CT, respectively, correctly depicted the absence of liver metastases in 35 and 32 patients (specificity, 100% and 97%; negative predictive value, 97% and 86%). CONCLUSION:FDG PET has a high sensitivity and specificity for detection of colorectal carcinomas (primary and liver metastases) and appears to be superior to CT in the staging of primary colorectal carcinoma.
Authors: Richdeep S Gill; Troy Perry; Jonathan T Abele; Eric L R Bédard; Daniel Schiller Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2012-01-27 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Pier Paolo Mainenti; Barbara Salvatore; Dario D'Antonio; Teresa De Falco; Giovanni Domenico De Palma; Francesco Paolo D'Armiento; Luigi Bucci; Leonardo Pace; Marco Salvatore Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-05-11 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Tonghe Wang; Yang Lei; Yabo Fu; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Jonathon A Nye; Xiaofeng Yang Journal: Phys Med Date: 2020-07-29 Impact factor: 2.685
Authors: A Orlacchio; O Schillaci; N Fusco; P Broccoli; M Maurici; M Yamgoue; R Danieli; S D'Urso; G Simonetti Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2009-05-14 Impact factor: 3.469