UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2017 UpToDate, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.

Medline ® Abstract for Reference 132

of 'Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and staging of exocrine pancreatic cancer'

132
TI
A prospective diagnostic accuracy study of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, multidetector row computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in primary diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer.
AU
Kauhanen SP, Komar G, Seppänen MP, Dean KI, Minn HR, Kajander SA, Rinta-Kiikka I, Alanen K, Borra RJ, Puolakkainen PA, Nuutila P, Ovaska JT
SO
Ann Surg. 2009 Dec;250(6):957-63.
 
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare the accuracy of combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography using F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET/CT), multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy.
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: FDG-PET/CT imaging is increasingly used for staging of pancreatic cancer. Preliminary data suggest a significant influence of FDG-PET/CT on treatment planning, although its role is still evolving.
METHODS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients with suspicion of pancreatic malignancy were enrolled. Patients underwent a protocol including FDG-PET/CT, MDCT, and MRI combined with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, all of which were blindly evaluated. The findings were confirmed macroscopically at operation and/or by histopathologic analysis (n = 29) or follow-up (n = 9). Results of TNM classification of different imaging methods were compared with clinical TNM classification.
RESULTS: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma was diagnosed in 17 patients, neuroendocrine tumor in 3, mass-forming pancreatitis in 4, cystic lesion in 6, and fibrosis in 2. Six patients had a finding of a normal pancreas. The diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET/CT for pancreatic malignancy was 89%, compared with 76% and 79% for MDCT and MRI, respectively. In the differential diagnosis of suspected malignant biliary stricture at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (n = 21), FDG-PET/CT had a positive predictive value of 92%. In 17 patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, FDG-PET/CT had a sensitivity of 30% for N- and 88% for M-staging. Both MDCT and MRI had sensitivities of 30% for N- and 38% for M-staging. Furthermore, the clinical management of 10 patients (26%) was altered after FDG-PET/CT.
CONCLUSION: FDG-PET/CT was more sensitive than conventional imaging in the diagnosis of both primary pancreatic adenocarcinoma and associated distant metastases. In contrast, the sensitivity of FDG-PET/CT was poor in detecting local lymph node metastasis, which would have been important for an assessment of resectability. We recommend the use of FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of diagnostically challenging cases, especially in patients with biliary strictures without evidence of malignancy in conventional imaging.
AD
Turku PET Centre, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. saila.kauhanen@tyks.fi
PMID