Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Acta Radiol. 2007 May;48(4):369-78.

Contrast-enhanced FDG-PET/CT vs. SPIO-enhanced MRI vs. FDG-PET vs. CT in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a prospective study with intraoperative confirmation.

Author information

1
Department of Radiology, Centre of Diagnostic Investigations, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. rh13821@rh.dk

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The choice of imaging before liver surgery is debated regarding the use of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, computed tomography (CT), and positron emission tomography (PET). No studies have compared contrast-enhanced PET/CT with superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced MR imaging.

PURPOSE:

To compare PET/CT with superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced MR imaging, PET, and CT in the detection of liver metastases (LM) and extrahepatic tumor from colorectal cancer (CRC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

Thirty-five patients with suspected LM underwent PET/CT with a contrast-enhanced CT protocol and SPIO-enhanced MR imaging. Readers independently analyzed images from MR imaging, PET/CT, and the CT part and PET part of the PET/CT study. Imaging findings were compared with surgical and histological findings.

RESULTS:

Lesion-by-lesion sensitivity and accuracy for liver lesions was 54% and 77% for PET alone, 66% and 83% for PET/CT, 82% and 82% for SPIO-enhanced MR imaging, and 89% and 77% for CT alone, respectively. CT and SPIO-enhanced MR imaging were less specific but significantly more sensitive than PET (P<0.0001). For extrahepatic tumor, sensitivity and specificity was 83% and 96% for PET/CT and 58% and 87% for CT, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

CT and SPIO-enhanced MR imaging are more sensitive but less specific than PET in the detection of LM. PET/CT can detect more patients with extrahepatic tumor than CT alone.

PMID:
17453514
DOI:
10.1080/02841850701294560
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon
Loading ...
Support Center