The Comparison of Computed Tomography Perfusion, Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography and Positron-Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for the Detection of Primary Esophageal Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficiency of computed tomography perfusion (CTP), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron-emission tomography (PET/CT) in the diagnosis of esophageal cancer. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This prospective study consisted of 33 patients with pathologically confirmed esophageal cancer, 2 of whom had an esophageal abscess. All the patients underwent CTP, CECT and PET/CT imaging and the imaging findings were evaluated. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each of the 3 imaging modalities relative to the histological diagnosis. RESULTS: Thirty-three tumors were visualized on CTP, 29 on CECT and 27 on PET/CT. Six tumors were stage 1, and 2 and 4 of these tumors were missed on CECT and PET/CT, respectively. Significant differences between CTP and CECT (p = 0.02), and between CTP and PET/CT (p = 0.04) were found for stage 1 tumors. Values for the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values on CTP were 100, 100, 100 and 100s%, respectively. Corresponding values on CECT were 93.94, 0, 93.94 and 0s%, respectively, and those on PET/CT were 87.88, 0, 93.55 and 0s%, respectively. Hence, the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of CTP were better than those of CECT and PET/CT. CONCLUSION: CTP had an advantage over CECT and PET/CT in detecting small lesions. CTP was valuable, especially in detecting stage 1 tumors.