Cargando…
Comparative Study between (18)F FDG-PET/CT and Whole Body MRI DWIBS in Assessment of Recurrent Breast Cancer (Prospective, Comparative, Cross-sectional Study Design)
AIM: This study aims to assess the diagnostic performance of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography ((18)FDG-PET/CT) compared to whole body (WB) magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with background body signal suppression (MR/DWIBS) in lesions de...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352640/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30713370 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijnm.IJNM_121_18 |
Sumario: | AIM: This study aims to assess the diagnostic performance of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computerized tomography ((18)FDG-PET/CT) compared to whole body (WB) magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with background body signal suppression (MR/DWIBS) in lesions detection in patients with recurrent breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three female patients with suspected breast cancer recurrence by clinical, laboratory, or conventional imaging underwent both (18)FDG-PET/CT and WB MR/DWIBS. WB (18)FDG-PET/CT was performed using the standard technique. WB MR/DWIBS acquired sequences were WB DWI with short tau inversion recovery (STIR), coronal T1, and coronal STIR. Both (18)FDG-PET/CT and WB-magnetic resonance imaging/DWIBS were independently interpreted using visual qualitative and quantitative analysis. Pathological findings and combined clinical/radiological follow-up data were used as a reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall accuracy were calculated for both techniques. RESULTS: PET/CT demonstrated higher specificity and sensitivity indices than MR/DWIBS in the detection of the nodal and distant lesions, while the latter displayed higher sensitivity in the detection of local breast lesions. The overall sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV, and accuracy of PET/CT were 84.8%, 86.3%, 90.4%, 78.7%, and 85.4% versus 82.1%, 78.0%, 85.2%, 74.0%, and 80.5% for MR/DWIBS. A high degree of agreement existed between PET/CT and MR-DWIBS. CONCLUSION: (18)FDG-PET/CT is more sensitive and has superiority in the assessment of nodal and distant lesions than DWIBS that has a potential superior role in the assessment of local breast lesions. DWIBS has a promising and helpful complementary tool for (18)FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of patients with proven malignancies. |
---|