4.5 Article

Incidental colonic focal lesions detected by FDG PET/CT

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY
Volume 185, Issue 2, Pages 495-500

Publisher

AMER ROENTGEN RAY SOC
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.185.2.01850495

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of FDG PET/CT for the detection of colonic lesions, especially advanced neoplasms (villous or > 10-mm adenomas, carcinomas). Because of F-18 FDG accumulation in adenomatous polyps, PET using FDG can detect early premalignant colorectal lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. FDG PET/CT studies performed for a 1-year period in 1,716 consecutive patients with various malignant diseases, except colorectal cancer, were retrospectively reviewed. PET images obtained 1 hr after FDG injection and noncontrast CT images used for attenuation correction were fused for analysis. Of 45 patients showing intense focal colonic FDG uptake, 20 patients (with 21 foci) underwent a colonoscopic investigation, and, when necessary, polyp resection. The intensity of FDG uptake was quantified using the standardized uptake value (SUVmax). RESULTS. The FDG colonic foci were associated with 18 colonoscopic abnormalities in 15 patients, with no colonic abnormality detected in five patients (false-positive [FP] results). Histopathologic findings revealed advanced neoplasms in 13 patients (13 villous adenomas and three carcinomas) and two cases of hyperplastic polyps. A difference in the mean SUVmax was found between FP and true-positive colonic FDG foci but was not statistically significant (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION. Presence of a focal colonic FDG uptake incidental finding on a PET/CT scan justifies a colonoscopy to detect (pre-)malignant lesions. The fusion of PET and CT images allows an accurate localization of the lesions. PET/CT is a useful tool to differentiate pathologic from physiologic FDG uptake.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available