An FDG PET investigation is a valuable method in the case of Ewing tumours. PET is superior to bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases of Ewing tumours. For the depiction of small lesions, mainly represented by pulmonary metastases, PET is less sensitive than helical computed tomography. Determination of the role of whole-body FDG PET in diagnostic algorithm needs further investigation.

The 1999 guideline revision appears to have had little impact on clinical practice. Further follow-up will reveal if guideline compliance had an effect on outcomes.

Summary Aim: Left ventricular volume and function can be computed from gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging using Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECT) or Gated SPECT Quantification (GS-Quant). The aim of this study was to compare both programs with respect to their practical application, stability and precision on heart-models as well as in clinical use. Methods: The volumes of five cardiac models were calculated by ECT and GS-Quant. 48 patients (13 female, 35 male) underwent a one day stress-rest protocol and gated SPECT. From these 96 gated SPECT images, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end-diastolic volume (EDV) and end-systolic volume (ESV) were estimated by ECT and GS-Quant. For 42 patients LVEF was also determined by echocardiography. Results: For the cardiac models the computed volumes showed high correlation with the model-volumes as well as high correlation between ECT and GS-Quant (r ≥ 0.99). Both programs underestimated the volume by approximately 20-30% independent of the ventricle-size. Calculating LVEF, EDV and ESV, GS-Quant and ECT correlated well to each other and to the LVEF estimated by echocardiography (r ≥ 0.86). LVEF values determined with ECT were about 10% higher than values determined with GS-Quant or echocardiography. The incorrect surfaces calculated by the automatic algorithm of GS-Quant for three examinations could not be corrected manually. 34 of the ECT studies were optimized by the operator. Conclusion: GS-Quant and ECT are two reliable programs in estimating LVEF. Both seem to underestimate the cardiac volume. In practical application GS-Quant was faster and easier to use. ECT allows the user to define the contour of the ventricle and thus is less susceptible to artifacts.