Journal of computer assisted tomography · 2015
Use of computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography for staging of local extent in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Frauenfelder Thomas, Kestenholz Peter, Hunziker Roger, Nguyen Thi Dan Linh, Fries Martina, Veit-Haibach Patrick, Husmann Lars, Stahel Rolf, Weder Walter, Opitz Isabelle
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET)/CT for staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in patients undergoing induction chemotherapy.
METHODS: Sixty-two patients (median age, 61 years; female: n = 9) with proven MPM underwent CT after induction chemotherapy. Of these, 28 underwent additional PET/CT. Extrapleural pneumonectomy was performed for pathological TNM staging. Clinical TNM stage was assessed by 3 independent readers. Relative and absolute underestimation and overestimation were compared with pathological tumor stage. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for differentiation between stages T2 and T3 were assessed. Interobserver agreement between the readers was analyzed (κ).
RESULTS: Positron emission tomography/CT and CT underestimated T stage in up to 30% of the cases. Positron emission tomography/CT had a higher accuracy for tumor extent compared with CT (PET/CT: 0.92; CT: 0.84). The accuracy for nodal staging was higher for CT than for PET/CT (PET/CT: 0.78; CT: 0.87). Concerning International Mesothelioma Interest Group classification, PET/CT improved the accuracy of preoperative staging compared with CT (PET/CT: 0.91; CT: 0.82). Interobserver agreement was moderate for CT (0.48-0.62) and good for PET/CT (0.64-0.83) for T staging. For nodal staging, interobserver agreement was fair to moderate for CT and good for PET/CT (CT: 0.37-0.51; PET/CT: 0.73-0.76).
CONCLUSIONS: Positron emission tomography/CT is more accurate and has a lower interobserver variability for clinical intrathoracic staging of MPM compared with CT. Nevertheless PET/CT underestimated tumor stage in a substantial number of cases, showing the need for a more accurate imaging technology or approach.
METHODS: Sixty-two patients (median age, 61 years; female: n = 9) with proven MPM underwent CT after induction chemotherapy. Of these, 28 underwent additional PET/CT. Extrapleural pneumonectomy was performed for pathological TNM staging. Clinical TNM stage was assessed by 3 independent readers. Relative and absolute underestimation and overestimation were compared with pathological tumor stage. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for differentiation between stages T2 and T3 were assessed. Interobserver agreement between the readers was analyzed (κ).
RESULTS: Positron emission tomography/CT and CT underestimated T stage in up to 30% of the cases. Positron emission tomography/CT had a higher accuracy for tumor extent compared with CT (PET/CT: 0.92; CT: 0.84). The accuracy for nodal staging was higher for CT than for PET/CT (PET/CT: 0.78; CT: 0.87). Concerning International Mesothelioma Interest Group classification, PET/CT improved the accuracy of preoperative staging compared with CT (PET/CT: 0.91; CT: 0.82). Interobserver agreement was moderate for CT (0.48-0.62) and good for PET/CT (0.64-0.83) for T staging. For nodal staging, interobserver agreement was fair to moderate for CT and good for PET/CT (CT: 0.37-0.51; PET/CT: 0.73-0.76).
CONCLUSIONS: Positron emission tomography/CT is more accurate and has a lower interobserver variability for clinical intrathoracic staging of MPM compared with CT. Nevertheless PET/CT underestimated tumor stage in a substantial number of cases, showing the need for a more accurate imaging technology or approach.