4.6 Article

Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in liver transplantation for hepatocarcinoma

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 21, 期 10, 页码 3049-3054

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i10.3049

关键词

Cancer; Hepatoma; Hepatocellular cancer; Liver transplantation

资金

  1. Astellas Belgium
  2. Academie de Recherche et d'Enseignement Superieur (ARES) of the Wallonia-Brussels Federation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment FDG positron emission tomography computed tomography (PET-CT) in patients with hepatocarcinoma treated by liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed the data of 27 patients (mean age 58 +/- 9 years) who underwent FDG PET-CT before LT for hepatocarcinoma. Mean follow-up was 26 +/- 18 mo. The FDG PET/CT was performed according to a standard clinical protocol: 4 MBqFDG/kg body weight, uptake 60 min, low-dose non-enhanced CT. The authors measured the SUVmax and SUVmean of the tumor and the normal liver. The tumor/liver activity ratios (RSUVmax and RSUVmean) were tested as prognostic factors and compared to the following conventional prognostic factors: MILAN, CLIP, OKUDA, TNM stage, alphafoetoprotein level, portal thrombosis, size of the largest nodule, tumor differentiation, microvascular invasion, underlying cirrhosis and liver function. RESULTS: Overall and recurrence free survivals were 80.7% and 67.4% at 3 years, and 70.6% and 67.4% at 5 years, respectively. According to a multivariate Cox model, only FDG PET/CT RSUVmax predicted recurrence free survival. Even though the MILAN criteria alone were not predictive, it is worth noting that none of the patients outside the MILAN criteria and with RSUVmax < 1.15 relapsed. CONCLUSION: FDG PET/CT with an RSUVmax cutoff value of 1.15 is a strong prognostic factor for recurrence and death in patients with HCC treated by LT in this retrospective series. Further prospective studies should test whether this metabolic index should be systematically included in the preoperative assessment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据