The clinical usefulness of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the differential diagnosis, staging, and response evaluation after concurrent chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer
被引:120
作者:
论文数: 引用数:
h-index:
机构:
Bang, Seungmin
论文数: 引用数:
h-index:
机构:
Chung, Hye Won
Park, Seung Woo
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol,Inst Gastroenterol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
Park, Seung Woo
论文数: 引用数:
h-index:
机构:
Chung, Jae Bock
Yun, Mijin
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol,Inst Gastroenterol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
Yun, Mijin
Lee, Jong Doo
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol,Inst Gastroenterol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
Lee, Jong Doo
Song, Si Young
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol,Inst Gastroenterol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
Song, Si Young
机构:
[1] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Internal Med, Div Gastroenterol,Inst Gastroenterol, Seoul 120752, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Brain Korea Project Med Sci 21, Seoul 120752, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Coll Med, Dept Nucl Med, Seoul 120752, South Korea
Goals: The aims of this study were to determine the clinical use of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ((18)FDG-PET) in the differential diagnosis of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer and in the determination of tumor response after concurrent chemo radio therapy for pancreatic cancer. Background: Despite advances in diagnostic tools for pancreatic cancer, it is difficult to differentiate pancreatic cancer from mass-forming pancreatitis. Even with current imaging modalities, it is also difficult to assess tumor response to therapeutic intervention. Study: One hundred two patients with suspected pancreatic cancer were selected for this study. Dynamic computerized tomography (CT) scan and (18)FDG-PET were used sequentially to diagnose pancreatic cancer. After diagnostic confirmation their diagnostic yields were compared. We also evaluated the treatment response in 15 patients who underwent chemoradiation therapy with dynamic CT scan and (18)FDG-PET and compared their results. Results: In 93 out of 102 patients, pancreatic cancer was confirmed. (18)FDG-PET showed higher diagnostic accuracy than CT scan (95. 1 % vs. 76.5%). (18)FDG-PET was also superior to CT in the detection of liver metastasis. (18)FDG-PET detected treatment response in 5 out of 15 cases after chemoradiation therapy. whereas CT could not detect any treatment response. Comparing responder and nonresponder, (18)FDG-PET was able to predict significantly different prognosis (399 vs. 233 d, P < 0.05). Conclusions: (18)FDG-PET is a very useful tool in diagnosing pancreatic cancer. (18)FDG-PET may be also used as an adjunct for determining the treatment modality of pancreatic cancer and evaluating tumor response to chemoradiation therapy.