Cargando…

Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of CT and positron emission tomography (PET) in the diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Imaging findings of CT and PET in 36 patients (mean age, 53 years) in whom recurrent uterine cervical cancer was suspected were analyzed ret...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Dong Hee, Kim, Kie Hwan, Park, Sang Yoon, Lee, Byung Hee, Choi, Chang Woon, Chin, Soo Yil
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Radiological Society 2000
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2718139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11752929
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2000.1.1.51
_version_ 1782169972918714368
author Park, Dong Hee
Kim, Kie Hwan
Park, Sang Yoon
Lee, Byung Hee
Choi, Chang Woon
Chin, Soo Yil
author_facet Park, Dong Hee
Kim, Kie Hwan
Park, Sang Yoon
Lee, Byung Hee
Choi, Chang Woon
Chin, Soo Yil
author_sort Park, Dong Hee
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of CT and positron emission tomography (PET) in the diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Imaging findings of CT and PET in 36 patients (mean age, 53 years) in whom recurrent uterine cervical cancer was suspected were analyzed retrospectively. Between October 1997 and May 1998, they had undergone surgery and/or radiation therapy. Tumor recurrence was confirmed by pathologic examination or follow-up studies. RESULTS: In detecting recurrent uterine cervical cancer, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 77.8%, 83.3%, and 80.5%, respectively, while for PET, the corresponding figures were 100%, 94.4%, and 97.2%. The Chi-square test revealed no significant difference in specificity (p = .2888), but significant differences in sensitivity (p = .0339) and accuracy (p = .0244). CONCLUSION: PET proved to be a reliable screening method for detecting recurrent uterine cervical cancer, but to determine the anatomical localization of recurrent tumors, and thus decide an adequate treatment plan, CT was eventually needed.
format Text
id pubmed-2718139
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2000
publisher The Korean Radiological Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27181392009-07-30 Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography Park, Dong Hee Kim, Kie Hwan Park, Sang Yoon Lee, Byung Hee Choi, Chang Woon Chin, Soo Yil Korean J Radiol Original Article OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of CT and positron emission tomography (PET) in the diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Imaging findings of CT and PET in 36 patients (mean age, 53 years) in whom recurrent uterine cervical cancer was suspected were analyzed retrospectively. Between October 1997 and May 1998, they had undergone surgery and/or radiation therapy. Tumor recurrence was confirmed by pathologic examination or follow-up studies. RESULTS: In detecting recurrent uterine cervical cancer, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CT were 77.8%, 83.3%, and 80.5%, respectively, while for PET, the corresponding figures were 100%, 94.4%, and 97.2%. The Chi-square test revealed no significant difference in specificity (p = .2888), but significant differences in sensitivity (p = .0339) and accuracy (p = .0244). CONCLUSION: PET proved to be a reliable screening method for detecting recurrent uterine cervical cancer, but to determine the anatomical localization of recurrent tumors, and thus decide an adequate treatment plan, CT was eventually needed. The Korean Radiological Society 2000 2000-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC2718139/ /pubmed/11752929 http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2000.1.1.51 Text en Copyright © 2000 The Korean Radiological Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Park, Dong Hee
Kim, Kie Hwan
Park, Sang Yoon
Lee, Byung Hee
Choi, Chang Woon
Chin, Soo Yil
Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography
title Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography
title_full Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography
title_fullStr Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography
title_short Diagnosis of Recurrent Uterine Cervical Cancer: Computed Tomography versus Positron Emission Tomography
title_sort diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer: computed tomography versus positron emission tomography
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2718139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11752929
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2000.1.1.51
work_keys_str_mv AT parkdonghee diagnosisofrecurrentuterinecervicalcancercomputedtomographyversuspositronemissiontomography
AT kimkiehwan diagnosisofrecurrentuterinecervicalcancercomputedtomographyversuspositronemissiontomography
AT parksangyoon diagnosisofrecurrentuterinecervicalcancercomputedtomographyversuspositronemissiontomography
AT leebyunghee diagnosisofrecurrentuterinecervicalcancercomputedtomographyversuspositronemissiontomography
AT choichangwoon diagnosisofrecurrentuterinecervicalcancercomputedtomographyversuspositronemissiontomography
AT chinsooyil diagnosisofrecurrentuterinecervicalcancercomputedtomographyversuspositronemissiontomography