PET/CT versus conventional CT for detection of lymph node metastases in patients with locally advanced bladder cancer

Aljabery, Firas; Lindblom, Gunnar; Skoog, Susann; Shabo, Ivan; Olsson, Hans; Rosell, Johan; Jahnson, Staffan

doi:10.1186/s12894-015-0080-z

Cited by 42 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result have micrometastases (31). In addition, PET has been reported to show limited performance in the detection of lymph node metastases, especially in small lesions (32). With the addition of DW imaging information, however, PET/MR imaging may increase the sensitivity for lymph node metastases, as shown in our study (40.0% [four of 10 patients] with PET/MR imaging vs 10.0% [one of 10 patients] with PET/CT plus multidetector CT).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preoperative Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer with FDG PET/MR Imaging versus FDG PET/CT Plus Contrast-enhanced Multidetector CT: A Prospective Preliminary Study

Joo¹,

Lee²,

Lee³

et al. 2017

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To determine the diagnostic performance of fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the preoperative assessment of pancreatic cancer in comparison with that of FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) plus contrast material-enhanced multidetector CT. Materials and Methods This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board; written informed consent was obtained. Thirty-seven patients with 39 pancreatic tumors underwent preoperative FDG PET/MR imaging, PET/CT, and contrast-enhanced multidetector CT. The authors measured maximal and mean standardized uptake values (SUV and SUV, respectively) of pancreatic cancer at PET/MR imaging and PET/CT. Two radiologists independently reviewed the two imaging sets (set 1, PET/MR imaging; set 2, PET/CT plus multidetector CT) to determine tumor resectability according to a five-point scale, N stage (N0 or N positive), and M stage (M0 or M1). With use of clinical-surgical-pathologic findings as the standard of reference (n = 20), diagnostic performances of the two imaging sets were compared by using the McNemar test. Results Both SUV and SUV of pancreatic tumors showed strong correlations between PET/MR imaging and PET/CT (r = 0.897 and 0.890, respectively; P < .001). The diagnostic performance of PET/MR imaging was not significantly different from that of PET/CT plus multidetector CT in the assessment of tumor resectability (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.891 vs 0.776, respectively, for reviewer 1 [P = .109] and 0.859 vs 0.797 for reviewer 2 [P = .561]), N stage (accuracy: 54% [seven of 13 patients] vs 31% [four of 13 patients]; P = .250 for both reviewers), and M stage (accuracy: 94% [16 of 17 patients] vs 88% [15 of 17 patients] for reviewer 1 [P > .999] and 94% [16 of 17 patients] vs 82% [14 of 17 patients] for reviewer 2 [P = .500]). Conclusion FDG PET/MR imaging showed a diagnostic performance similar to that of PET/CT plus contrast-enhanced multidetector CT in the preoperative evaluation of the resectability and staging of pancreatic tumors. RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preoperative Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer with FDG PET/MR Imaging versus FDG PET/CT Plus Contrast-enhanced Multidetector CT: A Prospective Preliminary Study

Joo¹,

Lee²,

Lee³

et al. 2017

Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There were a total of 785 patients in the included studies, and their age ranged from 23 to 87 years. Of all 14 studies, 8 studies enrolled the patients retrospectively [15, 25, 26, 29, 31-34]; the remaining 6 studies [13, 14, 24, 27, 28, 30] enrolled the patients prospectively. All studies used PET/CT as the imaging modality in their studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a patient-based analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT were calculated as 50, 96.2, 80, 86.2, and 85.3%, respectively [28]. In a study with 54 locally advanced BC patients, F-18 FDG PET/CT had 41% sensitivity, 86% specificity, a 58% positive predictive value, and a 76% negative predictive value in detecting and localizing regional LN metastasis in BC patients [29]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT for Preoperative Lymph Node Staging in Newly Diagnosed Bladder Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Koo

Kim

2018

Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for preoperative lymph node (LN) staging in newly diagnosed bladder cancer (BC) patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Patients and Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database, from the earliest available date of indexing through June 30, 2017, were searched for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of F-18 FDG PET/CT for preoperative LN staging in newly diagnosed BC. We determined the sensitivities and specificities across studies, calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR–), and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: Across 14 studies (785 patients), the pooled sensitivity was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.49–0.64) and the pooled specificity was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.87–0.95). The LR syntheses gave an overall LR+ of 7.4 (95% CI: 4.4–12.3) and an LR– of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.39–0.56). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 16 (95% CI: 9–28). Conclusions: F-18 FDG PET/CT shows a low sensitivity and high specificity for the detection of metastatic LNs in patients with newly diagnosed BC.

show abstract

“…Goodfellow et al ( 27 ) in their study on 233 bladder cancer patients, published in 2014, showed only a small benefit in detecting lymph node metastases outside the pelvis when compared to CT (sensitivity 69% vs. 41% respectively), which the authors considered not to be enough to justify the use of preoperative FDG-PET outside of a proposed selected group of patients. Recently, Aljabery et al ( 26 ) [2015] and Pichler et al ( 23 ) [2017], based on the results of their studies both concluded that FDG-PET provided no advantage over CT in detection of metastatic lymph nodes in bladder cancer.…”

Section: Positron-emission Tomography (Pet)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of lymph node status in patients with urothelial carcinoma—still in search of the perfect imaging modality: a systematic review

Frączek¹,

Kamecki²,

Kamecka³

et al. 2018

Transl. Androl. Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While accurate lymph node status evaluation in urothelial carcinoma patients is essential for the correct disease staging and, hence, establishing the most beneficial treatment strategy, the diagnostic performance of routine imaging in regards to this issue is not satisfactory. For the purpose of this article, we systematically reviewed the contemporary literature on the sensitivity and specificity of particular imaging modalities which have been studied for detecting lymph node metastases in patients diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma. The evidence reviewed shows that computed tomography (CT), although recognized as the imaging modality of choice, is associated with marked limitations, resulting in its low sensitivity for lymph node involvement detection in urothelial carcinoma patients, with no study reporting a value higher than 46% using standard cut-off values. Markedly higher sensitivity rates may be achieved with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), especially when using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide as the contrast agent, however, no uniform protocol has been systematically studied up to date. The vast majority of recent evidence concerns positron emission tomography (PET), which is being reported to improve the diagnostic performance of CT alone, as has been demonstrated in multiple articles, which investigated the accuracy of PET/CT at primary or post-treatment staging of urothelial carcinoma patients. However, there has been substantial heterogeneity in terms of methodology and results between those studies, making it premature to draw any definitive conclusions. The results of this review lead to a conclusion, that while CT, despite being not fully satisfactory, still remains the gold-standard method of imaging for staging purposes in urothelial carcinoma, other imaging modalities are under investigation, with promising results.

show abstract

PET/CT versus conventional CT for detection of lymph node metastases in patients with locally advanced bladder cancer

Cited by 42 publications

References 29 publications

Preoperative Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer with FDG PET/MR Imaging versus FDG PET/CT Plus Contrast-enhanced Multidetector CT: A Prospective Preliminary Study

Preoperative Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer with FDG PET/MR Imaging versus FDG PET/CT Plus Contrast-enhanced Multidetector CT: A Prospective Preliminary Study

Diagnostic Accuracy of F-18 FDG PET/CT for Preoperative Lymph Node Staging in Newly Diagnosed Bladder Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Evaluation of lymph node status in patients with urothelial carcinoma—still in search of the perfect imaging modality: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About