Cargando…
Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography
BACKGROUND: After the diagnosis Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma (NSCLC) has been established, consideration must turn toward the stage of disease, because this will impact directly on management and prognosis. Staging is used to predict survival and to guide the patient toward the most appropriate tre...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4331828/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25608616 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1470-7330-14-23 |
_version_ | 1782357788259778560 |
---|---|
author | Harders, Stefan Walbom Madsen, Hans Henrik Hjorthaug, Karin Arveschoug, Anne Kirstine Rasmussen, Torben Riis Meldgaard, Peter Hoejbjerg, Johanne Andersen Pilegaard, Hans Kristian Hager, Henrik Rehling, Michael Rasmussen, Finn |
author_facet | Harders, Stefan Walbom Madsen, Hans Henrik Hjorthaug, Karin Arveschoug, Anne Kirstine Rasmussen, Torben Riis Meldgaard, Peter Hoejbjerg, Johanne Andersen Pilegaard, Hans Kristian Hager, Henrik Rehling, Michael Rasmussen, Finn |
author_sort | Harders, Stefan Walbom |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: After the diagnosis Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma (NSCLC) has been established, consideration must turn toward the stage of disease, because this will impact directly on management and prognosis. Staging is used to predict survival and to guide the patient toward the most appropriate treatment regimen or clinical trial. Distinguishing malignant involvement of the mediastinal lymph nodes (N2 or N3) from the hilar lymph nodes, or no lymph nodes (N0 or N1) is critical, because malignant involvement of N2 or N3 lymph nodes usually indicates non–surgically resectable disease. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare CT versus integrated F18-FDG PET/low dose CT (FDG PET/CT) for mediastinal staging in NSCLC, and the desire was to safely distinguish between malignant and benign lesions without the need for invasive procedures. All results were controlled for reproducibility. METHODS: 114 participants with NSCLC were included in a prospective cohort study. Blinded CT and FDG PET/CT images were reviewed. The participants’ mediastinums were staged based on lymph node sizes (CT), or on FDG uptake (FDG PET/CT). Reference standard was tissue sampling. RESULTS: We found that there was no measureable difference between CT and FDG PET/CT mediastinal staging results; overall two-thirds of the participants in the study were correctly staged, and almost one-third of the participants were falsely staged. CONCLUSION: Neither CT nor FDG PET/CT could obviate the need for further invasive staging prior to thoracotomy in patients with NSCLC; for that purpose, the results of both modalities were too meagre. Therefore, these patients still depend on invasive staging methods. In our study, invasive staging was accomplished by mediastinoscopy. However, today this is increasingly replaced by EBUS or EUS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4331828 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43318282015-02-19 Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography Harders, Stefan Walbom Madsen, Hans Henrik Hjorthaug, Karin Arveschoug, Anne Kirstine Rasmussen, Torben Riis Meldgaard, Peter Hoejbjerg, Johanne Andersen Pilegaard, Hans Kristian Hager, Henrik Rehling, Michael Rasmussen, Finn Cancer Imaging Research Article BACKGROUND: After the diagnosis Non-Small-Cell Lung Carcinoma (NSCLC) has been established, consideration must turn toward the stage of disease, because this will impact directly on management and prognosis. Staging is used to predict survival and to guide the patient toward the most appropriate treatment regimen or clinical trial. Distinguishing malignant involvement of the mediastinal lymph nodes (N2 or N3) from the hilar lymph nodes, or no lymph nodes (N0 or N1) is critical, because malignant involvement of N2 or N3 lymph nodes usually indicates non–surgically resectable disease. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare CT versus integrated F18-FDG PET/low dose CT (FDG PET/CT) for mediastinal staging in NSCLC, and the desire was to safely distinguish between malignant and benign lesions without the need for invasive procedures. All results were controlled for reproducibility. METHODS: 114 participants with NSCLC were included in a prospective cohort study. Blinded CT and FDG PET/CT images were reviewed. The participants’ mediastinums were staged based on lymph node sizes (CT), or on FDG uptake (FDG PET/CT). Reference standard was tissue sampling. RESULTS: We found that there was no measureable difference between CT and FDG PET/CT mediastinal staging results; overall two-thirds of the participants in the study were correctly staged, and almost one-third of the participants were falsely staged. CONCLUSION: Neither CT nor FDG PET/CT could obviate the need for further invasive staging prior to thoracotomy in patients with NSCLC; for that purpose, the results of both modalities were too meagre. Therefore, these patients still depend on invasive staging methods. In our study, invasive staging was accomplished by mediastinoscopy. However, today this is increasingly replaced by EBUS or EUS. BioMed Central 2014-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4331828/ /pubmed/25608616 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1470-7330-14-23 Text en Copyright © 2014 Harders et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Harders, Stefan Walbom Madsen, Hans Henrik Hjorthaug, Karin Arveschoug, Anne Kirstine Rasmussen, Torben Riis Meldgaard, Peter Hoejbjerg, Johanne Andersen Pilegaard, Hans Kristian Hager, Henrik Rehling, Michael Rasmussen, Finn Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
title | Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
title_full | Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
title_fullStr | Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
title_full_unstemmed | Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
title_short | Mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
title_sort | mediastinal staging in non-small-cell lung carcinoma: computed tomography versus f-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and computed tomography |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4331828/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25608616 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1470-7330-14-23 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hardersstefanwalbom mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT madsenhanshenrik mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT hjorthaugkarin mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT arveschougannekirstine mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT rasmussentorbenriis mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT meldgaardpeter mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT hoejbjergjohanneandersen mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT pilegaardhanskristian mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT hagerhenrik mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT rehlingmichael mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography AT rasmussenfinn mediastinalstaginginnonsmallcelllungcarcinomacomputedtomographyversusf18fluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyandcomputedtomography |