Preoperative detecting metastases of cervical cancer in pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes:comparison of integrated ~(18)F-FDG PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement

Purpose: Compared the performance of contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT for preoperatively detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. Methods: This prospective study included 72 patients with clinically M0 cervical cancer. They underwent su...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:核技术:英文版 2012, Vol.23 (5), p.305-311
1. Verfasser: XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 311
container_issue 5
container_start_page 305
container_title 核技术:英文版
container_volume 23
creator XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli
description Purpose: Compared the performance of contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT for preoperatively detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. Methods: This prospective study included 72 patients with clinically M0 cervical cancer. They underwent surgery within two weeks of PET/CT imaging. Imaging consisted of a whole-body PET/CT protocol without intravenous contrast, followed by abdominal and pelvic PET/CT protocol including contrast-enhanced CT. We compared the diagnostic efficiency between the methods on per-patient and per-lesion basis. Results: Patient-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 63.6% (14/22), 94.0% (47/50), and 84.7%(61/72), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 54.5% (12/22), 88.0% (44/50), and 77.8% (56/72), respectively, and those of enhanced CT alone were 36.4% (8/22), 80.0% (40/50), and 66.7% (48/72), respectively. Lesion-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 77.7% (87/112), 98.7%(938/950), and 96.5% (1025/1062), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 69.6% (78/112), 97.5% (926/950), and 94.5% (1004/1062), respectively, and those of enhanced CT were 54.4% (61/112), 96.1% (913/950), and 91.7% (974/1062), respectively. Contrast-enhanced PET/CT had the best sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Although patient-based analysis showed no significant difference between contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT (p =0.540, 0.295 and 0.286), the specificity and accuracy of these two methods were significantly different on lesion-based analysis (p =0.043 and 0.027).
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>chongqing</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_chongqing_primary_44408830</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cqvip_id>44408830</cqvip_id><sourcerecordid>44408830</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-chongqing_primary_444088303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNTkFOwzAQtBCVCJQ_LA-IsBMD4VwaOPaQe2U528QoXgfbFPXCGb7AK3hA_pQv4CIegLTS7O6MZuaEZUUheF4KeXfKMsG5yCsuizN2HsIz51Le3txn7Hvj0Y3oVTR7hBYj6mioA4tRhTQYwO1Ao98brQbQitIOhmDEIb1AUQuj8ipXzsd0Dwc79kCuxTBPX9rZRJrg6OhiKGKXkrCF93n6ENU8fdZ5_fAIm3VzvWrgzcQenP9F9xpBO4o-1QCk_hhskeKSLXZqCHj5hxfsql43q6dc9466l9R9O3pjlT9spZS8qkpe_kfzA21ZZfc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Preoperative detecting metastases of cervical cancer in pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes:comparison of integrated ~(18)F-FDG PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</creator><creatorcontrib>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: Compared the performance of contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT for preoperatively detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. Methods: This prospective study included 72 patients with clinically M0 cervical cancer. They underwent surgery within two weeks of PET/CT imaging. Imaging consisted of a whole-body PET/CT protocol without intravenous contrast, followed by abdominal and pelvic PET/CT protocol including contrast-enhanced CT. We compared the diagnostic efficiency between the methods on per-patient and per-lesion basis. Results: Patient-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 63.6% (14/22), 94.0% (47/50), and 84.7%(61/72), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 54.5% (12/22), 88.0% (44/50), and 77.8% (56/72), respectively, and those of enhanced CT alone were 36.4% (8/22), 80.0% (40/50), and 66.7% (48/72), respectively. Lesion-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 77.7% (87/112), 98.7%(938/950), and 96.5% (1025/1062), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 69.6% (78/112), 97.5% (926/950), and 94.5% (1004/1062), respectively, and those of enhanced CT were 54.4% (61/112), 96.1% (913/950), and 91.7% (974/1062), respectively. Contrast-enhanced PET/CT had the best sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Although patient-based analysis showed no significant difference between contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT (p =0.540, 0.295 and 0.286), the specificity and accuracy of these two methods were significantly different on lesion-based analysis (p =0.043 and 0.027).</description><identifier>ISSN: 1001-8042</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2210-3147</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>CT成像 ; PET ; 子宫颈癌 ; 对比度增强 ; 检测 ; 淋巴结 ; 盆腔 ; 腹主动脉</subject><ispartof>核技术:英文版, 2012, Vol.23 (5), p.305-311</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Uhttp://image.cqvip.com/vip1000/qk/85361X/85361X.jpg</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,4012</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</creatorcontrib><title>Preoperative detecting metastases of cervical cancer in pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes:comparison of integrated ~(18)F-FDG PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement</title><title>核技术:英文版</title><addtitle>Nuclear Science and Techniques</addtitle><description>Purpose: Compared the performance of contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT for preoperatively detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. Methods: This prospective study included 72 patients with clinically M0 cervical cancer. They underwent surgery within two weeks of PET/CT imaging. Imaging consisted of a whole-body PET/CT protocol without intravenous contrast, followed by abdominal and pelvic PET/CT protocol including contrast-enhanced CT. We compared the diagnostic efficiency between the methods on per-patient and per-lesion basis. Results: Patient-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 63.6% (14/22), 94.0% (47/50), and 84.7%(61/72), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 54.5% (12/22), 88.0% (44/50), and 77.8% (56/72), respectively, and those of enhanced CT alone were 36.4% (8/22), 80.0% (40/50), and 66.7% (48/72), respectively. Lesion-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 77.7% (87/112), 98.7%(938/950), and 96.5% (1025/1062), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 69.6% (78/112), 97.5% (926/950), and 94.5% (1004/1062), respectively, and those of enhanced CT were 54.4% (61/112), 96.1% (913/950), and 91.7% (974/1062), respectively. Contrast-enhanced PET/CT had the best sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Although patient-based analysis showed no significant difference between contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT (p =0.540, 0.295 and 0.286), the specificity and accuracy of these two methods were significantly different on lesion-based analysis (p =0.043 and 0.027).</description><subject>CT成像</subject><subject>PET</subject><subject>子宫颈癌</subject><subject>对比度增强</subject><subject>检测</subject><subject>淋巴结</subject><subject>盆腔</subject><subject>腹主动脉</subject><issn>1001-8042</issn><issn>2210-3147</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNTkFOwzAQtBCVCJQ_LA-IsBMD4VwaOPaQe2U528QoXgfbFPXCGb7AK3hA_pQv4CIegLTS7O6MZuaEZUUheF4KeXfKMsG5yCsuizN2HsIz51Le3txn7Hvj0Y3oVTR7hBYj6mioA4tRhTQYwO1Ao98brQbQitIOhmDEIb1AUQuj8ipXzsd0Dwc79kCuxTBPX9rZRJrg6OhiKGKXkrCF93n6ENU8fdZ5_fAIm3VzvWrgzcQenP9F9xpBO4o-1QCk_hhskeKSLXZqCHj5hxfsql43q6dc9466l9R9O3pjlT9spZS8qkpe_kfzA21ZZfc</recordid><startdate>2012</startdate><enddate>2012</enddate><creator>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</creator><scope>2RA</scope><scope>92L</scope><scope>CQIGP</scope><scope>W92</scope><scope>~WA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2012</creationdate><title>Preoperative detecting metastases of cervical cancer in pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes:comparison of integrated ~(18)F-FDG PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement</title><author>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-chongqing_primary_444088303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>CT成像</topic><topic>PET</topic><topic>子宫颈癌</topic><topic>对比度增强</topic><topic>检测</topic><topic>淋巴结</topic><topic>盆腔</topic><topic>腹主动脉</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</creatorcontrib><collection>中文科技期刊数据库</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库-CALIS站点</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库-7.0平台</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库-工程技术</collection><collection>中文科技期刊数据库- 镜像站点</collection><jtitle>核技术:英文版</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>XING Yan ZHAO Jinhua SONG Jianhua CHEN Xiang QIAO Wenli</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Preoperative detecting metastases of cervical cancer in pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes:comparison of integrated ~(18)F-FDG PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement</atitle><jtitle>核技术:英文版</jtitle><addtitle>Nuclear Science and Techniques</addtitle><date>2012</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>305</spage><epage>311</epage><pages>305-311</pages><issn>1001-8042</issn><eissn>2210-3147</eissn><abstract>Purpose: Compared the performance of contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT for preoperatively detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. Methods: This prospective study included 72 patients with clinically M0 cervical cancer. They underwent surgery within two weeks of PET/CT imaging. Imaging consisted of a whole-body PET/CT protocol without intravenous contrast, followed by abdominal and pelvic PET/CT protocol including contrast-enhanced CT. We compared the diagnostic efficiency between the methods on per-patient and per-lesion basis. Results: Patient-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 63.6% (14/22), 94.0% (47/50), and 84.7%(61/72), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 54.5% (12/22), 88.0% (44/50), and 77.8% (56/72), respectively, and those of enhanced CT alone were 36.4% (8/22), 80.0% (40/50), and 66.7% (48/72), respectively. Lesion-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of contrast-enhanced PET/CT were 77.7% (87/112), 98.7%(938/950), and 96.5% (1025/1062), respectively, whereas those of non-enhanced PET/CT were 69.6% (78/112), 97.5% (926/950), and 94.5% (1004/1062), respectively, and those of enhanced CT were 54.4% (61/112), 96.1% (913/950), and 91.7% (974/1062), respectively. Contrast-enhanced PET/CT had the best sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Although patient-based analysis showed no significant difference between contrast-enhanced PET/CT and non-enhanced PET/CT (p =0.540, 0.295 and 0.286), the specificity and accuracy of these two methods were significantly different on lesion-based analysis (p =0.043 and 0.027).</abstract></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1001-8042
ispartof 核技术:英文版, 2012, Vol.23 (5), p.305-311
issn 1001-8042
2210-3147
language eng
recordid cdi_chongqing_primary_44408830
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects CT成像
PET
子宫颈癌
对比度增强
检测
淋巴结
盆腔
腹主动脉
title Preoperative detecting metastases of cervical cancer in pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes:comparison of integrated ~(18)F-FDG PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T11%3A34%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-chongqing&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Preoperative%20detecting%20metastases%20of%20cervical%20cancer%20in%20pelvic%20and%20para-aortic%20lymph%20nodes%EF%BC%9Acomparison%20of%20integrated%20~%EF%BC%8818%EF%BC%89F-FDG%20PET/CT%20with%20or%20without%20contrast%20enhancement&rft.jtitle=%E6%A0%B8%E6%8A%80%E6%9C%AF%EF%BC%9A%E8%8B%B1%E6%96%87%E7%89%88&rft.au=XING%20Yan%20ZHAO%20Jinhua%20SONG%20Jianhua%20CHEN%20Xiang%20QIAO%20Wenli&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=305&rft.epage=311&rft.pages=305-311&rft.issn=1001-8042&rft.eissn=2210-3147&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cchongqing%3E44408830%3C/chongqing%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cqvip_id=44408830&rfr_iscdi=true