[en] BACKGROUND: Assessment of metastatic involvement of the liver remains a diagnostic challenge. The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential role of FDG PET in the detection of liver metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-four patients with malignancy and possible liver involvement were included. Liver metastases were present in 31 cases, demonstrated by histopathological analysis in 15 cases and by follow-up in 16 cases. The negative cases were confirmed by pathology in four cases, peroperative ultrasonography in 12 cases, and follow-up in 17 cases. Whole-body FDG PET was compared to CT (n = 53) and US (n = 43). RESULTS: PET demonstrated a 97% sensitivity, an 88% specificity and a 92% accuracy, compared to 93%, 75% and 85%, respectively, for CT (P = NS). Concordant results were obtained in 44 of 64 patients (69%: 19 TP. 25 TN). PET provided new and accurate information in 15 of 64 patients (23.4%). PET demonstrated liver metastases in 11 patients in whom conventional methods yielded negative (two cases) or doubtful (nine cases) results. Four patients free of liver involvement were correctly staged with PET, while CT/US were equivocal. PET was erroneous in five of 64 cases (7.8%, four FP, one FN). CONCLUSIONS: FDG PET allows an accurate screening of liver involvement in patients with malignancy. Combined with CT, it provides additional diagnostic information that could directly affect the management of these patients.
Disciplines :
Oncology Radiology, nuclear medicine & imaging
Author, co-author :
Hustinx, Roland ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Médecine nucléaire
Paulus, Patrick
Jacquet, Nicolas
Jerusalem, Guy ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Oncologie médicale
Bury, Thierry ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Pneumologie-Allergologie
Rigo, Pierre ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences de la motricité > Pathologie générale et médecine nucléaire
Language :
English
Title :
Clinical evaluation of whole-body 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of liver metastases.
Adson MA, Van Heerden JA, Ason MH et al. Resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Arch Surg 1984; 119: 647-51.
Malt RA. Current concept: Surgery for hepatic neoplasms. N Engl J Med 1985; 313: 1591-6.
Sugarbaker PH, Kemeny N. Management of metastatic liver cancer. Adv Surg 1988; 22; 1-55.
Sugarbaker PH. Surgical decision making for large bowel cancer metastatic to the liver. Radiology 1990; 174: 621-6.
Baker ME, Pelley R. Hepatic metastases: Basic principles and implications for radiologists. Radiology 1995; 197: 329-37.
Warburg O. The Metabolism of Tumors. New York: Smith RR 1931; 129-69.
Hatanaka M. Transport of sugar in tumor cell membranes. Biochem Biophys Acta 1974; 355: 77-104.
Weber G. Enzymology of cancer cells. N Engl J Med 1977; 296: 541-51.
Rigo P, Paulus P, Kaschten BJ et al. Oncological applications of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. Eur J Nucleic Med 1996; 12: 1641-74.
Wahl RL. Positron emission tomography: Application in oncology. In Murray ICP, Ell PJ (eds): Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment. London: Churchill Livingstone 1995; 801-20.
Conti PS, Lilien DL, Hawley E et al. PET and 18F-FDG in oncology: A clinical update. Nucl Med Biol 1996; 23: 717-35.
Ferrucci J. Liver tumor imaging: Current concepts. AJR 1990; 155: 473-84.
de Lange EE. Cross-sectional imaging of the liver. Baillière's Clin Gastroenterol 1995; 9 (1): 97-120.
Kuszyk B, Bluemke D. Urban B et al. Portal-phase contrast-enhanced helical CT for the detection of malignant hepatic tumors: Sensitivity based on comparison with intraoperative and pathologic findings. AJR 1996; 166: 91-5.
Zeman R, Silverman P, Cooper C et al. Helical (spiral) computed tomography. Implications for imaging of the abdomen. Gastoenterol Clin North Am 1995; 24 (2): 183-99.
Bonaldi V, Bret P, Reinhold C et al. Helical CT of the liver: Value of an early hepatic arterial phase. Radiology 1995; 197: 357-63.
Van Ooijen B, Oudkerk M, Schmitz P et al. Detection of liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma: Is there a place for routine computed tomography arteriography? Surgery 1996; 119 (5): 511-6.
Vitola J, Delbeke D, Sandler P et al. Positron emission tomography to stage suspected metastatic colorectal carcinoma to the liver. Am J Surg 1996; 171: 21-6.
Schiepers C, Penninckx F, De Vadder N et al. Contribution of PET in the diagnosis of recurrent coloreclal cancer: Comparison with conventional imaging. Eur J Surg One 1995; 21: 517-22.
Hagspiel K, Neidl K, Eichenberger A et al. Detection of liver metastases: Comparison of superparamagnetic iro oxide-enhanced and unenhanced MR imaging at 1.5T with dynamic CT. intraoperative US, and percutaneous US. Radiology 1995; 196: 471-8.
Zerhouni E, Rutter C, Hamilton S et al. CT and MR imaging in the staging of colorectal carcinoma: Report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group II. Radiology 1996; 200: 443-51.
de Lange EE, Mugler J, Gay S et al. Focal liver disease: Comparison of breath-hold T1-weighted MP-GRE MR imaging and contrast-enhanced CT. Lesion detection, localization, and characterization. Radiology 1996; 200: 465-73.
Seneterre E, Taourel P, Bouvier P et al. Detection of hepatic metastases: ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging and CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1996; 200: 785-92.
Vogl T, Hammerstingl R. Schwarz M et al. Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging for diffential giagnosis of focal liver lesions. Radiology 1996; 198: 881-7.
Rummeny E, Wernecke K, Saini S et al. Comparison between high-field-strength MR imaging and CT for screening of hepatic metastases: A receiver operating characteristic analysis. Radiology 1992; 182: 879-86.
