0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detection of recurrence and metastases in renal cell carcinoma—are we underusing PET/CT?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          PURPOSE

          The aim of this study was to compare 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography–computed tomography ( 18F-FDG PET/CT) scan with computed tomography (CT) scan for detecting recurrence and metastasis in renal cell carcinoma patients.

          METHODS

          This retrospective study included patients from October 2013 to April 2017. Contrast-enhanced CT and PET/CT scans were compared and correlated with histopathology or/and follow-up studies.

          RESULTS

          Seventy-six patients, 60 males, were included. Lesions included primary renal, recurrent renal fossa lesions, lymph nodes, and distant metastatic lesions. Of 176 malignant lesions, CT detected 157 lesions; of which, 154 were true positive. Twenty-two false-negative lesions showed abnormal FDG uptake. CT scan had positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 98.0%, 37.1%, 87.5%, 81.2%, and 86.9%, respectively. All 176 lesions were PET/CT-positive. PET/CT had PPV, NPV, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 100% each. The specificity and NPV of PET/CT were superior ( P < .05).

          CONCLUSION

          PET/CT appears more accurate than CT scan for detecting metastasis and recurrence in renal cell carcinoma patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy.

          The use of standardized uptake values (SUVs) is now common place in clinical 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F] fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) position emission tomography-computed tomography oncology imaging and has a specific role in assessing patient response to cancer therapy. Ideally, the use of SUVs removes variability introduced by differences in patient size and the amount of injected FDG. However, in practice there are several sources of bias and variance that are introduced in the measurement of FDG uptake in tumors and also in the conversion of the image count data to SUVs. In this article the overall imaging process is reviewed and estimates of the magnitude of errors, where known, are given. Recommendations are provided for best practices in improving SUV accuracy. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Significance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography for the postoperative surveillance of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

            To evaluate the role of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron-emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for the surveillance of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who have a high risk of local recurrence or distant metastasis, by comparing the results with those of conventional imaging methods. Sixty-three patients with RCC had conventional imaging studies and FDG PET/CT during the follow-up after surgical treatment. Their pathological stages were T2 in 28 patients, T3a in 14, T3b in 19 and T4 in two; lymph-node or distant metastases were present in 12 patients. Suspicious recurrent or metastatic lesions were confirmed by histopathology or by clinical follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of conventional surveillance methods and FDG PET/CT were analysed. The difference in the accuracy of FDG PET/CT by nuclear grade and histological subtype of tumours was also assessed. The FDG PET/CT accurately classified the presence of a recurrence or metastasis in 56 (89%) patients. FDG PET/CT had an 89.5% sensitivity, 83.3% specificity, 77.3% positive predictive value, 92.6% negative predictive value, and 85.7% accuracy in detecting recurrence or metastasis, which was not significantly different from the results with conventional methods. Moreover, the accuracy of the FDG PET/CT by nuclear grade and histological subtypes was not significantly different. For the surveillance of high-risk RCC, FDG PET/CT had results that were as good as conventional methods and were not influenced by the nuclear grades of cancer cells. In addition, it was possible to examine all organ systems in one procedure, and there was no need for contrast agents, that can damage renal function. Therefore, FDG PET/CT might replace conventional methods.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical role of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for detection and management of renal cell carcinoma.

              We evaluate the accuracy of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) for staging and management of renal cell carcinoma. FDG-PET was performed in 25 patients with known or suspected primary renal tumors and/or metastatic disease and compared with conventional imaging techniques, including computerized tomography (CT). Histopathological confirmation was obtained in 18 patients and confirmation of the disease was by followup in the remainder. The impact of FDG-PET on disease management was also assessed. Of the 17 patients with known or suspected primary tumors FDG-PET was true positive in 15, true negative in 1 and false-negative in 1. Comparative CT was true positive in 16 patients and false-positive in 1. The accuracy of FDG-PET and CT was similar (94%). All patients would have undergone radical nephrectomy after conventional imaging findings but FDG-PET results altered treatment decisions for 6 (35%), of whom 3 underwent partial nephrectomy and 3 avoided surgery due to confirmation of benign pathology or detection of unsuspected metastatic disease. Of the 8 cases referred for evaluation of local recurrence and/or metastatic disease FDG-PET changed treatment decisions in 4 (50%), with disease up staged in 3 and recurrence excluded in 1. Compared with CT, FDG-PET was able to detect local recurrence and distant metastases more accurately and differentiated recurrence from radiation necrosis. FDG-PET accurately detected local disease spread and metastatic disease in patients with renal cell carcinoma and altered treatment in 40%. FDG-PET may have a role in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with renal cell carcinoma preoperatively and staging of metastatic disease.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Diagn Interv Radiol
                Diagn Interv Radiol
                Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
                Turkish Society of Radiology
                1305-3825
                1305-3612
                September 2022
                01 September 2022
                : 28
                : 5
                : 498-502
                Affiliations
                [1 ]From the Department of Nuclear Medicine (M.P. , N.S.), PD Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, India; and Department of Urology (C.B.P., S.N.L.S.), PD Hinduja National Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Mumbai, India.
                Author notes

                You may cite this article as: Pereira M, Punatar CB, Singh N, Sagade SN. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detection of recurrence and metastases in renal cell carcinoma—are we under-using PET/CT? Diagn Interv Radiol. 2022; 28(5): 498-502.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6730-9825
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4728-017X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3568-6829
                Article
                dir-28-5-498
                10.5152/dir.2022.21096
                9682604
                36218153
                ae2f9f48-f919-48a1-bc2d-507e39e38c90
                © Copyright 2022 authors

                Content of this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 19 March 2021
                : 6 July 2021
                Categories
                Original Article
                Modality-based (US, CT, MRI, PET-CT) Imaging

                Comments

                Comment on this article