Cargando…

Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue

OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the accuracy of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET for differentiating tumor progression from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective review of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET in 23 cases of primary brain tumors (17 high grade and 6 low grade glial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kumar, Yogesh, Gupta, Nishant, Mangla, Manisha, Hooda, Kusum, Mangla, Rajiv
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5464496/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28441783
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.3.759
_version_ 1783242780799139840
author Kumar, Yogesh
Gupta, Nishant
Mangla, Manisha
Hooda, Kusum
Mangla, Rajiv
author_facet Kumar, Yogesh
Gupta, Nishant
Mangla, Manisha
Hooda, Kusum
Mangla, Rajiv
author_sort Kumar, Yogesh
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the accuracy of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET for differentiating tumor progression from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective review of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET in 23 cases of primary brain tumors (17 high grade and 6 low grade glial neoplasms) and 5 cases of metastatic lesions with enhancing lesions on post-treatment MRI was performed. The accuracy of MR perfusion versus 18-FDG-PET for distinguishing between nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue and tumor recurrence was assessed. RESULTS: Both CBV (p<0.004) and SUV (p<0.02) are higher in recurrent tumors than necrosis. MR perfusion has an accuracy of 94.5% for differentiating between tumor recurrence and necrosis, while 18-FDG-PET has an accuracy of 85.1% for differentiating between tumor recurrence and nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. CONCLUSION: Overall, recurrent tumor demonstrates significantly higher CBV and SUV than nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. However, MR perfusion appears to be more accurate than FDG PET for distinguishing the two entities.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5464496
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54644962017-08-28 Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue Kumar, Yogesh Gupta, Nishant Mangla, Manisha Hooda, Kusum Mangla, Rajiv Asian Pac J Cancer Prev Research Article OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the accuracy of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET for differentiating tumor progression from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective review of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET in 23 cases of primary brain tumors (17 high grade and 6 low grade glial neoplasms) and 5 cases of metastatic lesions with enhancing lesions on post-treatment MRI was performed. The accuracy of MR perfusion versus 18-FDG-PET for distinguishing between nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue and tumor recurrence was assessed. RESULTS: Both CBV (p<0.004) and SUV (p<0.02) are higher in recurrent tumors than necrosis. MR perfusion has an accuracy of 94.5% for differentiating between tumor recurrence and necrosis, while 18-FDG-PET has an accuracy of 85.1% for differentiating between tumor recurrence and nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. CONCLUSION: Overall, recurrent tumor demonstrates significantly higher CBV and SUV than nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. However, MR perfusion appears to be more accurate than FDG PET for distinguishing the two entities. West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5464496/ /pubmed/28441783 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.3.759 Text en Copyright: © Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-SA/4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Research Article
Kumar, Yogesh
Gupta, Nishant
Mangla, Manisha
Hooda, Kusum
Mangla, Rajiv
Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue
title Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue
title_full Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue
title_fullStr Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue
title_short Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue
title_sort comparison between mr perfusion and 18f-fdg pet in differentiating tumor recurrence from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5464496/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28441783
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.3.759
work_keys_str_mv AT kumaryogesh comparisonbetweenmrperfusionand18ffdgpetindifferentiatingtumorrecurrencefromnonneoplasticcontrastenhancingtissue
AT guptanishant comparisonbetweenmrperfusionand18ffdgpetindifferentiatingtumorrecurrencefromnonneoplasticcontrastenhancingtissue
AT manglamanisha comparisonbetweenmrperfusionand18ffdgpetindifferentiatingtumorrecurrencefromnonneoplasticcontrastenhancingtissue
AT hoodakusum comparisonbetweenmrperfusionand18ffdgpetindifferentiatingtumorrecurrencefromnonneoplasticcontrastenhancingtissue
AT manglarajiv comparisonbetweenmrperfusionand18ffdgpetindifferentiatingtumorrecurrencefromnonneoplasticcontrastenhancingtissue