Evaluation of Benign vs Malignant Hepatic Lesions With Positron Emission Tomography

Delbeke, Dominique

doi:10.1001/archsurg.133.5.510

Cited by 286 publications

(169 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

159

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Soft-tissue masses in conjunction with focally increased glucose metabolism above the surrounding tissue level were regarded as malignant. A maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of more than 2.5 (for extrahepatic lesions) and 3.5 (intrahepatic lesions) supported the diagnosis of a malignant lesion but was always considered in conjunction with the qualitative appearance of the lesion (e.g., a liver lesion with a SUVmax of 3.1 clearly demarcated from the background liver activity was considered malignant) (12).…”

Section: Image Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

Soyka¹,

Veit-Haibach²,

Strobel³

et al. 2008

J Nucl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

18 F-FDG PET/CT has gained wide acceptance for evaluation of recurrent colorectal carcinoma. However in clinical practice, contrast-enhanced CT (ceCT) is still the first-line restaging tool. The aim of this study was to investigate the value of contrastenhanced PET/CT (cePET/CT) as a first-line restaging tool with a special focus on the importance of the use of intravenous contrast. Methods: Fifty-four patients (17 women, 37 men; mean age, 60.3 y), referred for restaging of colorectal carcinoma, were examined with cePET/CT. Retrospective analysis was performed by 2 experienced readers by consensus: first, ceCT alone; second, non-cePET/CT; and third, cePET/CT. The number, localization, and diagnostic certainty of lesions were evaluated. Additionally, the therapeutic impact of the findings was determined. In 29 patients, histology, clinical imaging, and clinical follow-up served as the reference standard. In 25 patients, clinical follow-up and imaging served as the reference standard. Results: Overall, non-cePET/CT delivered correct additional information to the ceCT findings in 27 of 54 patients (50%). This occurred in (a) 20 of 30 patients, where ceCT was found to be inconclusive, and in (b) 7 of 24 patients with conclusive ceCT findings, where non-cePET/CT found additional lesions, leading to a therapy modification in 5 patients. Compared with non-cePET/ CT, cePET/CT revealed additional information in 39 of 54 patients (72%), with therapeutic relevance in 23 patients. This large number was primarily due to correct segmental localization of liver metastases, which is crucial for surgical therapy planning. Conclusion: On the basis of its higher accuracy and therapeutic impact compared with ceCT, our data suggest that cePET/CT might be considered as the first-line diagnostic tool for restaging in patients with colorectal cancer.

show abstract

Section: Image Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

Soyka¹,

Veit-Haibach²,

Strobel³

et al. 2008

J Nucl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The widely accepted imaging modalities for staging HCC are dynamic computed tomography (CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (5). However, CT and MRI have a limited ability to identify distant metastases (6). Previous studies have reported the role of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ( 18 F-FDG-PET/CT) in detecting distant metastasis in a variety of malignancies (7).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

18F-FDG PET CT as a prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma

Cho

Jun²,

Kim³

et al. 2015

Turk J Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our case, foci of increased 18 F-FDG uptake in the transplanted liver were concerning for malignancy but were found to be benign inflammatory and ischemic changes including large bile duct necrosis, acute cholangitis, bile duct obstruction changes and periportal fibrosis. In non-transplanted liver, several non-malignant processes have been described to take up 18 F-FDG including: intrahepatic cholestasis (8), acute cholangitis (9,10), sclerosing cholangitis (11), liver abscess (12,13), hepatic pseudotumor (14), and hepatic sarcoidosis (15).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Inflammatory and Ischemic Post Liver Transplant Complications Mimic Malignancy on 18F-FDG PET/CT

Makis¹,

Ciarallo

Probst

2018

Mirt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 65-year-old male patient with a one year history of liver transplantation was referred for an 18 F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ( 18 F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) to rule out post transplant lymphoproliferative disease. Multiple foci of intense abnormal 18 F-FDG uptake were seen in the transplanted liver which were concerning for malignancy. Explantation of the liver approximately 1 month following the PET/CT revealed multiple inflammatory and ischemic changes including large bile duct necrosis, acute cholangitis, bile duct obstruction changes and periportal fibrosis, with no evidence of malignancy. We present the 18 F-FDG PET/CT image findings of this case.

show abstract

Evaluation of Benign vs Malignant Hepatic Lesions With Positron Emission Tomography

Cited by 286 publications

References 16 publications

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

18F-FDG PET CT as a prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma

Inflammatory and Ischemic Post Liver Transplant Complications Mimic Malignancy on 18F-FDG PET/CT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Evaluation of Benign vs Malignant Hepatic Lesions With Positron Emission Tomography

Cited by 286 publications

References 16 publications

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

18F-FDG PET CT as a prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma

Inflammatory and Ischemic Post Liver Transplant Complications Mimic Malignancy on 18F-FDG PET/CT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?

Staging Pathways in Recurrent Colorectal Carcinoma: Is Contrast-Enhanced ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT the Diagnostic Tool of Choice?