Lymph Node Detection of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas by Positron Emission Tomography With Fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 in a Routine Clinical Setting

Abstract

A short PET protocol that is suitable for routine clinical use is superior to morphologic procedures (computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) for the detection of lymph node involvement in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas.

Diagnostic Procedures for Detection of Lymph Node Metastases in Cancer of the Larynx

“…PET investigation revealed a higher sensitivity (87%) and specificity (94%) compared with CT values of 65 and 47% and MRI values of 88 and 40%, respectively [15].…”

“…We could demonstrate in a nonselected patient group that a short PET protocol, which is suitable for routine clinical use, is superior to morphologic procedures (CT or MRI) for lymph node staging of HNSCCs [15]. PET investigation revealed a higher sensitivity (87%) and specificity (94%) compared with CT values of 65 and 47% and MRI values of 88 and 40%, respectively [15].…”

“…MRI and/or CT scan were previously performed on 70 patients with HNSCC, who had neck dissection (34 ipsilateral, 36 bilateral). MRI had a sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 40%, compared with CT scans, which revealed a sensitivity of 65% and a specificity of 47% [15].…”

Positron Emission Tomography for Radiation Treatment Planning

“…Sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET, CT and MRI in the detection of lymph node matastases in patients with head-andneck cancer were evaluated in 7 studies including 452 patients [1,6,42,57,82,98,126]. The reported sensitivity of FDG-PET ranged from 70% [126] to 90% [1] and the specificity from 82% [126] to 99% [6].…”

Estudio del cáncer de laringe e hipofaringe en los pacientes del Hospital General Universitario de Castellón durante un periodo de 10 años (1998-2007)

“…Investigaciones revelaron una mayor sensibilidad (87%) y especificidad (94%) en comparación con los valores de la TAC de 65% y 47% y resonancia magnética de 88 y 40%, respectivamente (55). Ya que esta investigación es costosa y limitada a ciertos lugares, su uso como procedimiento diagnóstico de rutina no es actualmente factible.…”