Gynecologic oncology · 2013
PET/CT in the staging of patients with a pelvic mass suspicious for ovarian cancer.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dauwen H, Van Calster B, Deroose C M, Op de Beeck K, Amant F, Neven P, Berteloot P, Leunen K, Timmerman D, Vergote I
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively assess the value of PET/CT for staging, diagnosis and operability of ovarian cancer, with special attention to the peritoneal spread.
METHODS: From June 2009 to March 2011, 69 patients with suspicion of having an ovarian cancer underwent an (18)F-FDG PET/CT. To identify the diagnostic value of PET/CT, the results were compared with the findings at diagnostic laparoscopy and/or debulking surgery.
RESULTS: There were 56 patients with malignant tumors and 13 with benign tumors. We observed a sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 77%, respectively for malignant tumors with PET/CT. CT alone had a sensitivity and specificity of 96% and 38%, respectively. The overall FIGO classification evaluation for PET/CT and CT were the same. For the evaluation of metastases, the sensitivity of PET/CT was worse, while the specificity was better than CT. Retroperitoneal lymph node metastases were diagnosed better with PET/CT, while there was no difference for peritoneal spread and for the intestines. PET/CT detected another unknown primary tumor in 3 (4.3%) cases.
CONCLUSION: PET/CT is better than CT in detecting retroperitoneal lymph node metastases, but not for peritoneal metastases.
METHODS: From June 2009 to March 2011, 69 patients with suspicion of having an ovarian cancer underwent an (18)F-FDG PET/CT. To identify the diagnostic value of PET/CT, the results were compared with the findings at diagnostic laparoscopy and/or debulking surgery.
RESULTS: There were 56 patients with malignant tumors and 13 with benign tumors. We observed a sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 77%, respectively for malignant tumors with PET/CT. CT alone had a sensitivity and specificity of 96% and 38%, respectively. The overall FIGO classification evaluation for PET/CT and CT were the same. For the evaluation of metastases, the sensitivity of PET/CT was worse, while the specificity was better than CT. Retroperitoneal lymph node metastases were diagnosed better with PET/CT, while there was no difference for peritoneal spread and for the intestines. PET/CT detected another unknown primary tumor in 3 (4.3%) cases.
CONCLUSION: PET/CT is better than CT in detecting retroperitoneal lymph node metastases, but not for peritoneal metastases.