FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0

Boellaard, Ronald; OʼDoherty, M. J.; Weber, Wolfgang; Mottaghy, Felix M.; Lonsdale, Markus Nowak; Stroobants, Sigrid; Oyen, Wim J.G.; Kotzerke, J.; Hoekstra, Otto S.; Pruim, Jan; Marsden, Paul; Tatsch, Klaus; Hoekstra, C.; Visser, Eric P.; Arends, Bertjan; Verzijlbergen, Fred; Zijlstra, Josée M.; Comans, Emile F.I.; Lammertsma, Adriaan A.; Paans, Anne M. J.; Willemsen, Antoon T. M.; Beyer, Thomas; Bockisch, Andreas; Schaefer-Prokop, Cornelia; Delbeke, Dominique; Baüm, Richard; Chiti, Arturo; Krause, Bernd J.

doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4

Cited by 1,155 publications

(1,082 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,042

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Actually, most centres now have integrated PET/CT systems, and with the new crystals and techniques widely used, PET/CT has a better spatial resolution (transverse resolution: 4.4-4.9 mm; axial resolution: 4.5-5.6 mm in general), to be more accurate, for lesion localization and characterization than PET and CT alone. 39,40 However, our analysis was unable to identify if 18 F-FDG-PET/CT is better than 18 F-FDG-PET alone (p . 0.05).…”

Section: Heterogeneity Results and Subgroup Analysismentioning

confidence: 56%

Meta-analysis of diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting lymph node and distant metastases in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Shen¹,

Zhang²,

Jia³

et al. 2014

The British Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors Guohua Shen and Wenjie Zhang contributed equally to this work.Objective: We performed this meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/CT for detecting lymph node and distant metastases in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Methods: Through a search of four English and three Chinese databases (January 1990 to June 2013), pooled estimated sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated based on the data extracted from the included studies. We also constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves, with the area under the curve (AUC) and obtained the Q* index. Heterogeneity and subgroup analysis were also performed. Conclusion:The present meta-analysis showed that PET or PET/CT has excellent diagnostic performance for detecting lymph node and distant metastases in patients with NPC. Advances in knowledge: To provide evidence to assess the role of PET or PET/CT in staging of NPC.

show abstract

Section: Heterogeneity Results and Subgroup Analysismentioning

confidence: 56%

Meta-analysis of diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting lymph node and distant metastases in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Shen¹,

Zhang²,

Jia³

et al. 2014

The British Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although protocols have been established to standardize the interpretation of PET scans, 11 the quantitative assessment of tumor responses and the comparison among studies require rigorous quality control. 12 In 2007, on the basis of the collective expertise of its members, the International Harmonization Project (IHP) subcommittee developed consensus recommendations for the use of FDG-PET in lymphoma. 8 Visual assessment alone was considered adequate for reading FDG-PET scans at the completion of therapy.…”

Section: Interpretation Of Pet Scansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positron Emission Tomographic Scans in Lymphoma: Convention and Controversy

Ansell

Armitage

2012

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of sensitive and specific imaging techniques for accurate initial staging and evaluation of response to therapy in patients with lymphoma is essential for their optimal management. Fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) integrated with computed tomography (CT) has emerged as a powerful imaging tool and is being routinely used in staging, response evaluation, and posttreatment surveillance in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma. PET/CT is currently widely used in clinical practice, but the established clinical benefit is currently restricted to the posttreatment evaluation of Hodgkin lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and follicular lymphoma. Although used in other histologic subtypes and in other clinical situations including response assessment, its impact on patient outcome remains to be demonstrated. We performed a literature search of PubMed from 1999 to 2011 using the following keywords: PET scan, FDG-PET, PET/CT, lymphoma. This review addresses the challenges and controversies in the use of PET/CT scans in the management of patients with lymphoma. I n most patients with lymphoma, positron emission tomographic (PET) scans show abnormalities at diagnosis. Normal findings on the scan after therapy is highly predictive of a good prognosis, particularly in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma. However, the optimal application of PET scans to the management of all patients with lymphoma remains problematic. The major controversies include the optimal timing of PET scans (for staging, during therapy, after completion of therapy, surveillance in remission), standardization of PET scan interpretation (visual interpretation compared with standard uptake value [SUV] calculation), what constitutes a positive PET scan result, and whether PET scans should be used to direct management (eg, does changing therapy in patients with positive findings on PET change outcome, should biopsies of sites with positive PET results be done routinely before a management change). Although a large body of literature addressing these topics exists, the studies are often difficult to compare, making definitive conclusions on all these issues difficult. The previously published studies often used different designs and variable reporting, making interpretation and comparison of the results difficult. In the early studies particularly, heterogeneous populations with different stages of disease and different histologic subtypes were included, making the clinical applicability of the studies' results difficult. More recent studies focusing on efforts to standardize the conduct and interpretation of PET scans and on riskadapted therapies based on interim PET scan results will, it is hoped, improve the management and outcome of patients with lymphoma. A literature search of PubMed from 1999 to 2011 was performed using the following keywords: PET scan, FDG-PET, PET/CT, lymphoma. We highlight the current standard use ...

show abstract

“…PET/CT was performed according to the EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging [27]. Patients fasted for at least 4 h prior to injection of a standard dose of approximately 350 MBq of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG).…”

Section: Patient Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrimination and anatomical mapping of PET-positive lesions: comparison of CT attenuation-corrected PET images with coregistered MR and CT images in the abdomen

Kuhn

Crook

Mader

et al. 2012

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose PET/MR has the potential to become a powerful tool in clinical oncological imaging. The purpose of this prospective study was to evaluate the performance of a single T1-weighted (T1w) fat-suppressed unenhanced MR pulse sequence of the abdomen in comparison with unenhanced low-dose CT images to characterize PET-positive lesions. Methods A total of 100 oncological patients underwent sequential whole-body 18 F-FDG PET with CT-based attenuation correction (AC), 40 mAs low-dose CT and two-point Dixonbased T1w 3D MRI of the abdomen in a trimodality PET/CT-MR system. PET-positive lesions were assessed by CT and MRI with regard to their anatomical location, conspicuity and additional relevant information for characterization. Results From among 66 patients with at least one PETpositive lesion, 147 lesions were evaluated. No significant difference between MRI and CT was found regarding anatomical lesion localization. The MR pulse sequence used performed significantly better than CT regarding conspicuity of liver lesions (p<0.001, Wilcoxon signed ranks test), whereas no difference was noted for extrahepatic lesions. For overall lesion characterization, MRI was considered superior to CT in 40 % of lesions, equal to CT in 49 %, and inferior to CT in 11 %. Conclusion Fast Dixon-based T1w MRI outperformed lowdose CT in terms of conspicuity and characterization of PET-positive liver lesions and performed similarly in extrahepatic tumour manifestations. Hence, under the assumption that the technical issue of MR AC for whole-body PET examinations is solved, in abdominal PET/MR imaging the replacement of low-dose CT by a single Dixon-based MR pulse sequence for anatomical lesion correlation appears to be valid and robust.

show abstract

FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0

Cited by 1,155 publications

References 30 publications

Meta-analysis of diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting lymph node and distant metastases in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Meta-analysis of diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting lymph node and distant metastases in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Positron Emission Tomographic Scans in Lymphoma: Convention and Controversy

Discrimination and anatomical mapping of PET-positive lesions: comparison of CT attenuation-corrected PET images with coregistered MR and CT images in the abdomen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About