Performance of integrated FDG–PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG–PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT
Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) using 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose with IV contrast for depiction of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer and to assess the impact of PET/contrast-enhanced CT findings on c...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European Journal of Nuclear Medicine 2008-08, Vol.35 (8), p.1439-1448 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose
The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) using
18
F-fluorodeoxyglucose with IV contrast for depiction of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer and to assess the impact of PET/contrast-enhanced CT findings on clinical management, compared with PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and CT component.
Methods
One hundred thirty-two women previously treated for ovarian cancer underwent PET/CT consisting of non-enhanced and contrast-enhanced CT for suspected recurrence. PET/contrast enhanced CT, PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT, and enhanced CT were interpreted by two experienced radiologists by consensus for each investigation. Lesion status was determined on the basis of histopathology, radiological imaging, and clinical follow-up for longer than 6 months.
Results
Patient-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PET/contrast-enhanced CT were 78.8% (52 of 66), 90.9% (60 of 66), and 84.8% (112 of 132), respectively, whereas those of PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT were 74.2% (49 of 66), 90.9% (60 of 66), and 82.6% (109 of 132), respectively, and those of enhanced CT were 60.6% (40 of 66), 84.8% (56 of 66), and 72.7% (96 of 132), respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy differed significantly among the three modalities (Cochran
Q
test:
p
= 0.0001,
p
= 0.018, and
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 1619-7070 0340-6997 1619-7089 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00259-008-0776-3 |