We have located links that may give you full text access.
Diagnostic value of PET/CT for the staging and restaging of pediatric tumors.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective study was to compare the diagnostic value of 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D: -glucose positron emission tomography ((18)F-FDG PET)/CT versus (18)F-FDG PET and CT alone for staging and restaging of pediatric solid tumors.
METHODS: Forty-three children and adolescents (19 females and 24 males; mean age, 15.2 years; age range, 6-20 years) with osteosarcoma (n = 1), squamous cell carcinoma (n = 1), synovial sarcoma (n = 2), germ cell tumor (n = 2), neuroblastoma (n = 2), desmoid tumor (n = 2), melanoma (n = 3), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5), Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 7), non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (n = 9), and Ewing's sarcoma (n = 9) who had undergone (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging for primary staging or follow-up of metastases were included in this study. The presence, location, and size of primary tumors was determined separately for PET/CT, PET, and CT by two experienced reviewers. The diagnosis of the primary tumor was confirmed by histopathology. The presence or absence of metastases was confirmed by histopathology (n = 62) or clinical and imaging follow-up (n = 238).
RESULTS: The sensitivities for the detection of solid primary tumors using integrated (18)F-FDG PET/CT (95%), (18)F-FDG PET alone (73%), and CT alone (93%) were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Seventeen patients showed a total of 153 distant metastases. Integrated PET/CT had a significantly higher sensitivity for the detection of these metastases (91%) than PET alone (37%; p < 0.05), but not CT alone (83%; p > 0.05). When lesions with a diameter of less than 0.5 cm were excluded, PET/CT (89%) showed a significantly higher specificity compared to PET (45%; p < 0.05) and CT (55%; p < 0.05). In a sub-analysis of pulmonary metastases, the values for sensitivity and specificity were 90%, 14%, 82% and 63%, 78%, 65%, respectively, for integrated PET/CT, stand-alone PET, and stand-alone CT. For the detection of regional lymph node metastases, (18)F-FDG PET/CT, (18)F-FDG PET alone, and CT alone were diagnostically correct in 83%, 61%, and 42%. A sub-analysis focusing on the ability of PET/CT, PET, and CT to detect osseous metastases showed no statistically significant difference between the three imaging modalities (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Our study showed a significantly increased sensitivity of PET/CT over that of PET for the detection of distant metastases but not over that of CT alone. However, the specificity of PET/CT for the characterization of pulmonary metastases with a diameter > 0.5 cm and lymph node metastases with a diameter of <1 cm was significantly increased over that of CT alone.
METHODS: Forty-three children and adolescents (19 females and 24 males; mean age, 15.2 years; age range, 6-20 years) with osteosarcoma (n = 1), squamous cell carcinoma (n = 1), synovial sarcoma (n = 2), germ cell tumor (n = 2), neuroblastoma (n = 2), desmoid tumor (n = 2), melanoma (n = 3), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5), Hodgkin's lymphoma (n = 7), non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (n = 9), and Ewing's sarcoma (n = 9) who had undergone (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging for primary staging or follow-up of metastases were included in this study. The presence, location, and size of primary tumors was determined separately for PET/CT, PET, and CT by two experienced reviewers. The diagnosis of the primary tumor was confirmed by histopathology. The presence or absence of metastases was confirmed by histopathology (n = 62) or clinical and imaging follow-up (n = 238).
RESULTS: The sensitivities for the detection of solid primary tumors using integrated (18)F-FDG PET/CT (95%), (18)F-FDG PET alone (73%), and CT alone (93%) were not significantly different (p > 0.05). Seventeen patients showed a total of 153 distant metastases. Integrated PET/CT had a significantly higher sensitivity for the detection of these metastases (91%) than PET alone (37%; p < 0.05), but not CT alone (83%; p > 0.05). When lesions with a diameter of less than 0.5 cm were excluded, PET/CT (89%) showed a significantly higher specificity compared to PET (45%; p < 0.05) and CT (55%; p < 0.05). In a sub-analysis of pulmonary metastases, the values for sensitivity and specificity were 90%, 14%, 82% and 63%, 78%, 65%, respectively, for integrated PET/CT, stand-alone PET, and stand-alone CT. For the detection of regional lymph node metastases, (18)F-FDG PET/CT, (18)F-FDG PET alone, and CT alone were diagnostically correct in 83%, 61%, and 42%. A sub-analysis focusing on the ability of PET/CT, PET, and CT to detect osseous metastases showed no statistically significant difference between the three imaging modalities (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Our study showed a significantly increased sensitivity of PET/CT over that of PET for the detection of distant metastases but not over that of CT alone. However, the specificity of PET/CT for the characterization of pulmonary metastases with a diameter > 0.5 cm and lymph node metastases with a diameter of <1 cm was significantly increased over that of CT alone.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app