Correlating computed tomography and positron emission tomography scan with operative findings in metastatic colorectal cancer

被引:35
作者
Johnson, K [1 ]
Bakhsh, A
Young, D
Martin, E
Arnold, M
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Med Ctr, Grant Med Ctr, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Med Ctr, Arthur G James Canc Hosp & Res Inst, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
关键词
PET scan; CT scan; metastatic colorectal cancer;
D O I
10.1007/BF02234732
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
INTRODUCTION: Several studies have been performed comparing computed tomography scan with positron emission tomography scan in clinical decision making. Unfortunately, therapeutic decisions are being made based on positron emission tomography scan data without a clear understanding of how well the diagnostic findings correlate with the clinical findings. METHODS. A retrospective review of 41 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was performed. All patients had both a computed tomography scan and a positron emission tomography scan before surgical exploration. All underwent surgical re-exploration. Findings were divided into hepatic, extrahepatic, and pelvic regions of the abdomen. Computed tomography scan and positron emission tomography scan findings were either confirmed or refuted by the operative findings. RESULTS: Positron emission tomography scan was found to be more sensitive than computed tomography scan when compared with actual operative findings in the liver (100 vs. 69 percent, P = 0.004), extrahepatic region (90 vs. 52 percent, P = 0.015), and abdomen as a whole (87 vs. 61 percent, P < 0.001). Sensitivities of positron emission tomography scan and computed tomography scan were not significantly different in the pelvic region (87 vs. 61 percent, P = 0.091). In each case, specificity was not significantly different between the two examinations. CONCLUSION: Computed tomography scan and positron emission tomography scan are both diagnostic tests useful in the evaluation of metastatic colorectal cancer. However, positron emission tomography scanning is more sensitive than computed tomography scanning and more likely to give the correct result when actual metastatic disease is present.
引用
收藏
页码:354 / 357
页数:4
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
Delbeke D, 1997, J NUCL MED, V38, P1196
[2]  
MARKOWITZ AJ, 2000, SEMIN COLON RECTAL S, V11, P41
[3]   LEVAMISOLE AND FLUOROURACIL FOR ADJUVANT THERAPY OF RESECTED COLON-CARCINOMA [J].
MOERTEL, CG ;
FLEMING, TR ;
MACDONALD, JS ;
HALLER, DG ;
LAURIE, JA ;
GOODMAN, PJ ;
UNGERLEIDER, JS ;
EMERSON, WA ;
TORMEY, DC ;
GLICK, JH ;
VEEDER, MH ;
MAILLIARD, JA .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1990, 322 (06) :352-358
[4]  
Moog F, 1999, J NUCL MED, V40, P1407
[5]   Detection of recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer: Comparison of position emission tomography and computed tomography [J].
Ogunbiyi, OA ;
Flanagan, FL ;
Dehdashti, F ;
Siegel, BA ;
Trask, DD ;
Birnbaum, EH ;
Fleshman, JW ;
Read, TE ;
Philpott, GW ;
Kodner, IJ .
ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 1997, 4 (08) :613-620
[6]  
Schiepers C, 1995, Eur J Surg Oncol, V21, P517, DOI 10.1016/S0748-7983(95)97046-0
[7]   Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose and false-positive results: A major problem in the diagnostics of oncological patients [J].
Strauss, LG .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 1996, 23 (10) :1409-1415
[8]   Whole-body PET imaging with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in management of recurrent colorectal cancer [J].
Valk, PE ;
Abella-Columna, E ;
Haseman, MK ;
Pounds, TR ;
Tesar, RD ;
Myers, RW ;
Greiss, HB ;
Hofer, GA .
ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 1999, 134 (05) :503-511
[9]   Cost-effectiveness of PET imaging in clinical oncology [J].
Valk, PE ;
Pounds, TR ;
Tesar, RD ;
Hopkins, DM ;
Haseman, MK .
NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1996, 23 (06) :737-743
[10]   Positron emission tomography to stage suspected metastatic colorectal carcinoma to the liver [J].
Vitola, JV ;
Delbeke, D ;
Sandler, MP ;
Campbell, MG ;
Powers, TA ;
Wright, JK ;
Chapman, WC ;
Pinson, CW .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1996, 171 (01) :21-26