Cargando…
Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma
To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of 2-18fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) and ultrasound (US) for staging patients with malignant melanoma. METHODS: In total, 258 patients (112 men and 146 women; mean age, 61 ± 16years) met the pr...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9592435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36281128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031092 |
_version_ | 1784814926306476032 |
---|---|
author | Weber, Philipp Arnold, Andreas Hohmann, Joachim |
author_facet | Weber, Philipp Arnold, Andreas Hohmann, Joachim |
author_sort | Weber, Philipp |
collection | PubMed |
description | To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of 2-18fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) and ultrasound (US) for staging patients with malignant melanoma. METHODS: In total, 258 patients (112 men and 146 women; mean age, 61 ± 16years) met the primary inclusion criteria for malignant melanoma without further malignancy proven by histopathology. This was a retrospective study of the diagnostic accuracy. All data were obtained from the hospital’s patient and radiology information system. Patients formed a consecutive series and were examined by 18F-FDG PET/CT and 176 additionally by US (US as a whole [wUS], peripheral lymph nodes [pUS], abdomen [aUS]), with a total of 584 (18)F-FDG PET/CT and 697 US. (18)F-FDG PET/CT and US revealed 824 and 726 lesions, respectively. Per-patient, per-examination, and per-lesion analyses were also performed. The reference standards used were histopathology or resection of lesions, and follow-up controls using other imaging methods. RESULTS: Significant differences (P < .05) were found in the per-examination for the sensitivity of (18)F-FDG PET/CT (0.80) compared to wUS (0.63) and pUS (0.61), and the specificity of (18)F-FDG PET/CT (0.96) compared to wUS (0.98) and aUS (0.99). In the PLA, there were significant differences in sensitivity and specificity for (18)F-FDG PET/CT (0.83, 0.91) compared to wUS (0.61, 0.98), pUS (0.60, 0.98), and aUS (0.61, 0.99). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET/CT is preferable to US for detecting both lymph node and abdominal metastases. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9592435 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95924352022-10-25 Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma Weber, Philipp Arnold, Andreas Hohmann, Joachim Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of 2-18fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) and ultrasound (US) for staging patients with malignant melanoma. METHODS: In total, 258 patients (112 men and 146 women; mean age, 61 ± 16years) met the primary inclusion criteria for malignant melanoma without further malignancy proven by histopathology. This was a retrospective study of the diagnostic accuracy. All data were obtained from the hospital’s patient and radiology information system. Patients formed a consecutive series and were examined by 18F-FDG PET/CT and 176 additionally by US (US as a whole [wUS], peripheral lymph nodes [pUS], abdomen [aUS]), with a total of 584 (18)F-FDG PET/CT and 697 US. (18)F-FDG PET/CT and US revealed 824 and 726 lesions, respectively. Per-patient, per-examination, and per-lesion analyses were also performed. The reference standards used were histopathology or resection of lesions, and follow-up controls using other imaging methods. RESULTS: Significant differences (P < .05) were found in the per-examination for the sensitivity of (18)F-FDG PET/CT (0.80) compared to wUS (0.63) and pUS (0.61), and the specificity of (18)F-FDG PET/CT (0.96) compared to wUS (0.98) and aUS (0.99). In the PLA, there were significant differences in sensitivity and specificity for (18)F-FDG PET/CT (0.83, 0.91) compared to wUS (0.61, 0.98), pUS (0.60, 0.98), and aUS (0.61, 0.99). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET/CT is preferable to US for detecting both lymph node and abdominal metastases. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9592435/ /pubmed/36281128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031092 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Weber, Philipp Arnold, Andreas Hohmann, Joachim Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
title | Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
title_full | Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
title_fullStr | Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
title_short | Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
title_sort | comparison of (18)f-fdg pet/ct and ultrasound in staging of patients with malignant melanoma |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9592435/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36281128 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031092 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT weberphilipp comparisonof18ffdgpetctandultrasoundinstagingofpatientswithmalignantmelanoma AT arnoldandreas comparisonof18ffdgpetctandultrasoundinstagingofpatientswithmalignantmelanoma AT hohmannjoachim comparisonof18ffdgpetctandultrasoundinstagingofpatientswithmalignantmelanoma |