Ces radiol. 2007, 61(3):314-320

18F-FDG-PET/CT of orofacial tumorsOriginal article

Eva Ferdova1,2, Jiří Ferda1,2, Petr Schmiedhuber1,2, Jan Záhlava1, Jiří Walter3, Petr Mukenšnabl4, Alena Skálová4, Ondřej Daum4
1 Oddělení nukleární medicíny FN, Plzeň-Lochotín
2 Radiodiagnostická klinika LF UK a FN, Plzeň
3 Stomatologická klinika LF UK a FN, Plzeň
4 Šiklův ústav patologické anatomie LF UK a FN, Plzeň

Aim: Staging of head and neck tumours is one of most difficult tasks in imaging techniques, due to the very complicated head and neck anatomy and serious problems with the differentiation of reactive enlarged lymph nodes and lymph nodes involved with metastases. Since more than 90 % of all malignant tumours of the head and neck are squamous-cell carcinomas with high levels of oxidative glycolysis, an evaluation of their metabolic activity using 18F-FDG is one of most effective indications for PET/CT.

Methods: The examination is performed after intravenous application of the 18F-FDG and its accumulation for one hour. Drinking and speaking is restricted during this accumulation to prevent artificial muscle 18F-FDG uptake and to minimize positive findings. In our hospital, high resolution PET is followed by the sub-milimeter isotropic acquisition of CT data after intravenous application of an iodinated contrast material. The acquisitions of head and neck region and trunk are performed separately to obtain optimal resolution in both regions.

Results: A 105 examinations of the head and neck tumours were performed on 87 patients in a group of 1,750 consecutive PET/CT examinations, and neck tumour examinations. The ratio between primary staging and restaging was 3:7. The most frequent indications were carcinomas of the tongue (19 examinations) and carcinomas of the salivary glands (19 examinations). Our 12 findings of distant metastases confirmed the importance of the use of whole body PET/CT in this indication.

Keywords: CT, head and neck tumors, 18F-FDG, PET/CT

Accepted: July 15, 2007; Published: September 1, 2007  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Ferdova E, Ferda J, Schmiedhuber P, Záhlava J, Walter J, Mukenšnabl P, et al.. 18F-FDG-PET/CT of orofacial tumors. Ces radiol. 2007;61(3):314-320.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Klener P. Nádory hlavy a krku. in Klinická onkologie. Galén: Praha 2002; 363-373.
    2. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 2000; 41(8): 1369-1379.
    3. Goerres GW, von Schulthess GK, Hany TF. Possitron emission tomography and PET CT of the head and neck: FDG uptake in normal anatomy, in benign lesions, and in changes resulting from treatment. Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179(5): 1337-1342. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    4. Halpern B, Yeom K, Fueger BJ, et al. Evaluation of suspected local reccurence in head and neck cancer: A comparison between PET and PET/CT for biopsy proven lesions. Eur J Radiol 2007; 62: 199-204. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    5. Farber LA, Bernard F, Machtay M, Smith RJ, et al. Detection of recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinomas after radiation therapy with 2-18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography. Laryngoscope 1999; 109(6): 970-975. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Adams S, Baum RP, Stuckensen T, Bitter K, Hor G. Prospective comparison of the 18F-FDG PET with conventional imaging modalities (CT, MRI, US) in lymph node staging of head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1998; 25(9): 1255-1260. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. Branstetter BF, Blodgett TM, Zimmer LA, et al. Head and neck malignancy: is PET/CT more accurate than PET or CT alone? Radiology 2005; 235(2): 580-586. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    8. Schroeder H, Yeung HWD, Gonen M, et al. Head and neck cancer: clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 2004; 231 (1): 65-72. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Gentry LR (ed). Normal anatomy of head and neck. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 1998; 8 (review journal).
    10. Lenz M, Hermans R. Imaging of the oropharynx and oral cavity. Part I: Normal anatomy. Eur Radiol 1996; 6: 362-368. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Lenz M, Hermans R. Imaging of the oropharynx and oral cavity. Part II: Pathology. Eur Radiol 2006; 6: 536-549. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Ferda J. Nádory mozku, hlavy a krku. In CT angiografie. Galén: Praha 2004; 354-355.
    13. Lauberbacher C, Saumweber D, Wagner-Manslau C, et al. Comparison of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET, MRI and endoscopy for staging head and neck squamous-cell carcinomas. J Nucl Med 1995; 36(10): 1747-1757.
    14. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, et al. Whole-body dual modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 2003; 290(24): 3199-3200. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    15. Troost EGC, Vogel WV, Merkx MAW, et al. 18F-FLT PET does not discriminate between reactive and metastatic lymph nodes in primary head and neck cancer patients. J Nucl M ed 2007; 48(5): 726-735. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content