Ces radiol. 2010, 64(3):185-191

18F-FDG PET/CT in pancreatic carcinoma: diagnosis and stagingOriginal article

Pavel Koranda1, Eva Buriánková1, Radim Formánek1, Jiří Kysučan2, Roman Havlík2, Miroslav Mysliveček1
1 Klinika nukleární medicíny LF UP a FN, Olomouc
2 I. chirurgická klinika LF UP a FN, Olomouc

Aim: To evaluate the reliability of contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT in the preoperative evaluation of patients with pancreatic masses and in the assessment of the resectability of pancreatic cancer.

Methods: A total of 106 patients with suspicion of pancreatic carcinomas or with diagnosed tumors underwent contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT. Malignancy was subsequently confirmed in 72 patients. Intraoperative findings (42 malignancies in 67 surgeries), follow-up CT and clinical investigation were used as reference standards.

Results: Contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT correctly detected pancreatic carcinoma in 61 patients, 18F-FDG PET/CT findings were negative in 11 patients, positive in 5 patients (sensitivity 85%, specificity 85%, accuracy 85%). Reliability of N and M staging was evaluated in the subgroup of 67 patients which underwent surgical exploration. Lymph node involvement (16 patients) was correctly detected using 18F-FDG PET/CT in 8 patients, PET/CT was negative in 8 patients and positive 4 patients (sensitivity 50%, specificity 92%, accuracy 82%). 18F-FDG PET/CT correctly revealed distant metastases (22 patients) in 12 patients, was negative in 10 patients and positive in 1 patient (sensitivity 55%, specificity 98%, accuracy 84%). According to 18F-FDG PET/CT results, 19 patients with pancreatic carcinoma were judged to have non-operable disease.

Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced multislice 18F-FDG PET/CT appears to be an attractive staging tool for pancreatic cancer, although the N and M sensitivity values are lower than levels of specificity. It could help to omit a non-indicated surgery in patients with advanced disease.

Keywords: 18F-FDG, positron-emission tomography, X-ray computed tomography, pancreatic neoplasms
Grants and funding:

Práce byla podpořena grantem IGA MZ ČR NT11023-3/2010.

Accepted: June 15, 2010; Published: September 1, 2010  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Koranda P, Buriánková E, Formánek R, Kysučan J, Havlík R, Mysliveček M. 18F-FDG PET/CT in pancreatic carcinoma: diagnosis and staging. Ces radiol. 2010;64(3):185-191.
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. Wray CJ, Ahmad SA, Methews JB, Lowy AM. Surgery for pancreatic cancer: recent controversies and current practice. Gastroenterology 2005; 128: 1626-1641. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    2. Smith SL, Rajan PS. Imaging of pancreatic adenonocarcinoma with emphasis on multidetector CT. Clin Radiol 2004; 59: 26-38. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    3. Schick V, Franzius C, Beyna T, et al. Diagnostic impact of 18F-FDG PET-CT evaluating solid pancreatic lesions versus endosonography, endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography with intraductal ultrasonography and abdominal ultrasound. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35(10): 1775-1785. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    4. Votrubová J, et al. Klinické PET a PET/CT. Praha: Galén 2009; 105-110.
    5. Reske SN. PET und PET-CT maligner Tumoren des exokrinen Pankreas Radiologe 2009; 49(2): 131-136. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Orlando LA, Kulasingam SL, Matchar DB. Meta-analysis: the detection of pancreatic malignancy with positron emission tomography. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2004; 20(10): 1063-1070. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. Heinrich S, Goerres GW, Schäfer M, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography influences on the management of resectable pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness. Ann Surg 2005; 242(2): 235-243. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    8. Farma JM, Santillan AA, Melis M, et al. PET/CT fusion scan enhances CT staging in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15(9): 2465-2471. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Performance of Integrated FDG-PET/Contrast-enhanced CT in the Diagnosis of Recurrent Pancreatic Cancer: Comparison with Integrated FDG-PET/Non-contrast-enhanced CT and Enhanced CT. Mol Imaging Biol 2009 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1007/s11307-009-0271-7. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. Strobel K, Heinrich S, Bhure U, et al. Contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT: 1-stop-shop imaging for assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer. J Nucl Med 2008; 49(9): 1408-1413. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Diederichs CG, Staib L, Vogel J, et al. Values and limitations of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography with preoperative evaluation of patients with pancreatic masses. Pancreas 2000; 20(2): 109-116. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Kauhanen SP, Komar G, Seppänen MP, et al. A prospective diagnostic accuracy study of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, multidetector row computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in primary diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 2009; 250(6): 957-963. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    13. Casneuf V, Delrue L, Kelles A, et al. Is combined 18F-fluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography/computed tomography superior to positron emission tomography or computed tomography alone for diagnosis, staging and restaging of pancreatic lesions? Acta Gastroenterol Belg 2007; 70(4): 331-338.
    14. Imai H, Doi R, Kanazawa H, et al. Preoperative assessment of para-aortic lymph node metastasis in patients with pancreatic cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2010; 15(3): 294-300. 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