UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma


Kubik-Huch, R A; Dörffler, W; von Schulthess, G K; Marincek, B; Köchli, O R; Seifert, Burkhardt; Haller, U; Steinert, H C (2000). Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. European Radiology, 10(5):761-767.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare prospectively the accuracy of whole-body positron emission tomography (PET), CT and MRI in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian cancer. Nineteen patients (age range 23-76 years) were recruited with suspicious ovarian lesions at presentation (n = 8) or follow-up for recurrence (n = 11). All patients were scheduled for laparotomy and histological confirmation. Whole-body PET with FDG, contrast-enhanced spiral CT of the abdomen, including the pelvis, and MRI of the entire abdomen were performed. Each imaging study was evaluated separately. Imaging findings were correlated with histopathological diagnosis. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for lesion characterization in patients with suspicious ovarian lesions (n = 7) were, respectively: 100, 67 and 86% for PET; 100, 67 and 86% for CT; and 100, 100 and 100% for MRI. For the diagnosis of recurrent disease (n = 10), PET had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 50% and accuracy of 90%. The PET technique was the only technique which correctly identified a single transverse colon metastasis. Results for CT were 40, 50 and 43%, and for MRI 86, 100 and 89%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was seen. Neither FDG PET nor CT nor MRI can replace surgery in the detection of microscopic peritoneal disease. No statistically significant difference was observed for the investigated imaging modalities with regard to lesion characterization or detection of recurrent disease; thus, the methods are permissible alternatives. The PET technique, however, has the drawback of less accurate spatial assignment of small lesions compared with CT and MRI.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare prospectively the accuracy of whole-body positron emission tomography (PET), CT and MRI in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian cancer. Nineteen patients (age range 23-76 years) were recruited with suspicious ovarian lesions at presentation (n = 8) or follow-up for recurrence (n = 11). All patients were scheduled for laparotomy and histological confirmation. Whole-body PET with FDG, contrast-enhanced spiral CT of the abdomen, including the pelvis, and MRI of the entire abdomen were performed. Each imaging study was evaluated separately. Imaging findings were correlated with histopathological diagnosis. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for lesion characterization in patients with suspicious ovarian lesions (n = 7) were, respectively: 100, 67 and 86% for PET; 100, 67 and 86% for CT; and 100, 100 and 100% for MRI. For the diagnosis of recurrent disease (n = 10), PET had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 50% and accuracy of 90%. The PET technique was the only technique which correctly identified a single transverse colon metastasis. Results for CT were 40, 50 and 43%, and for MRI 86, 100 and 89%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was seen. Neither FDG PET nor CT nor MRI can replace surgery in the detection of microscopic peritoneal disease. No statistically significant difference was observed for the investigated imaging modalities with regard to lesion characterization or detection of recurrent disease; thus, the methods are permissible alternatives. The PET technique, however, has the drawback of less accurate spatial assignment of small lesions compared with CT and MRI.

Citations

92 citations in Web of Science®
134 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI)
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2000
Deposited On:15 Oct 2015 08:05
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 19:26
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0938-7994
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300051000
PubMed ID:10823629

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations