4.6 Article

Utility of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in the preoperative staging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

ORAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 43, Issue 9, Pages 887-893

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2006.10.011

Keywords

head and neck; squamous cell carcinoma; positron emission; tomography; computed tomography; combined PET/CT; diagnostic accuracy; cervical metastasis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The combination of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) has been reported to be more accurate than CT or PET alone in a preoperative setting. We compared the diagnostic utility of preoperative PET/CT, PET and CT/MRI in 167 patients with newly diagnosed head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), of whom 104 underwent FDG PET and 63 underwent combined PET/CT with all receiving CT/MRI. These preoperative PET, PET/CT, and CT/MRI results were reviewed and their accuracies were compared in patients in whom diagnosis was confirmed histopathotogically. Age, sex, primary sites and stage, and nodal involvement were comparable between two groups. The accuracy of PET and PET/CT for detecting primary tumors and cervical metastases was comparable, but significantly higher than that of CT/MRI (98%-97% vs. 86-88% for primary; 92%-93% vs. 85%-86% for neck on a tevel-by-level basis; P <.05). PET and PET/CT gave false negative results: in 2 (2%) and 2 (3%) patients for primary tumors; in 6 (6%) and 3 (5%) patients for neck metastases, respectively. PET and PET/CT also gave false-positive results for cervical metastases in 5 (5%) and 4 (6%) patients, respectively. Compared with PET alone, preoperative FDG PET/CT may not yield significantly improved diagnostic accuracy in patients with HNSCC. Moreover, despite their high accuracy, PET and PET/CT may not abrogate the need for conventional imaging and pathologic staging based on primary resection and neck dissection. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available