> Detailanzeige

Al‐Ibraheem, Akram; Buck, Andreas K.; Benz, Matthias R.; Rudert, Maximilian; Beer, Ambros J.; Mansour, Asem; Pomykala, Kelsey L.; Haller, Bernhard; Juenger, Hendrik; Scheidhauer, Klemens; Schwaiger, Markus; Herrmann, Ken

18F‐Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcoma

Literatur-
verwaltung

Zur
Merkliste

Lösche von
Merkliste

Per Whatsapp teilen

Schließen

Merkliste



Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
  • Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: 18F‐Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcoma
  • Beteiligte: Al‐Ibraheem, Akram; Buck, Andreas K.; Benz, Matthias R.; Rudert, Maximilian; Beer, Ambros J.; Mansour, Asem; Pomykala, Kelsey L.; Haller, Bernhard; Juenger, Hendrik; Scheidhauer, Klemens; Schwaiger, Markus; Herrmann, Ken
  • Erschienen: Wiley, 2013
  • Erschienen in: Cancer
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27866
  • ISSN: 0008-543X; 1097-0142
  • Schlagwörter: Cancer Research ; Oncology
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND:</jats:title><jats:p>The clinical utility of modern hybrid imaging modalities for detecting recurrent bone or soft tissue sarcoma remains to be determined. In this report, the authors present a clinical study on the diagnostic accuracy and incremental value of integrated <jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (<jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT) in patients with a history of sarcoma who have clinically suspected disease recurrence.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS:</jats:title><jats:p>Forty‐three patients who had a history of bone or soft tissue sarcoma and had documented complete remission underwent <jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT. Image analysis was performed independently for <jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET (n = 43) and for contrast‐enhanced spiral CT (CE‐CT) (n = 30) by 2 separate readers, whereas combined <jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT (n = 43) images were analyzed in consensus by both readers. Imaging findings were rated on a 5‐point scale and finally were reported as malignant, benign, or equivocal. Imaging findings were validated either by histopathology (n = 24) or by clinical follow‐up (n = 19).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS:</jats:title><jats:p><jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT had greater sensitivity and specificity compared with CE‐CT alone (94% and 92% vs 78% and 67%, respectively), resulting in significantly greater accuracy (93% vs 73%; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .03). <jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT was particularly superior regarding detection of local recurrence or soft tissue lesions (sensitivity and specificity: 83% and 100% vs 50% and 100%, respectively) or bone metastases (100% and 100% vs 85% and 88%, respectively).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:</jats:title><jats:p><jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT had greater diagnostic accuracy in the detection of recurrent bone or soft tissue sarcoma compared with CE‐CT alone. The detection of local recurrence was the most evident advantage of <jats:sup>18</jats:sup>F‐FDG PET/CT over CE‐CT. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.</jats:p></jats:sec>
  • Zugangsstatus: Freier Zugang