4.2 Article

Does bone scintigraphy still have a role in the era of 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer?

期刊

ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
卷 34, 期 7, 页码 476-485

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12149-020-01474-7

关键词

Prostate; Cancer; Bone; Scintigraphy; 68 Ga-PSMA; PET; CT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objection We aimed to evaluate the role of bone scintigraphy (BS) which has long been the imaging modality of choice in prostate cancer (PCa) and performed a head-to-head comparison between BS, BS + SPECT/CT and 68 Ga-PSMA-PET/CT, for the detection of bone metastasis of PCa. Methods We evaluated 138 PCa patients who underwent BS and 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT and SPECT/CT of 102 of 138 patients. Images were interpreted retrospectively and areas of abnormally increased tracer uptake related to PCa were documented as benign, metastatic or equivocal. Equivocal uptakes were finally diagnosed based on a consensus review of correlative imaging. Patient- and lesion-based analysis was performed. Patients with superscan images were excluded from lesion-based analysis. Results At least one metastatic or equivocal uptake in skeleton was defined in 76 of 138 (55%) BS, in 33 of 102 (32.3%) SPECT/CT, and in 49 of 138 (35.5%) 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. 23 (16.7%) patients had also superscan findings on BS and 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. For patient-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were calculated as 91.1%, 64.5%, 73.1%, 55.4% and 93.7% for BS; 95.5%, 82.7%, 86.9%, 72.8% and 96.2% for BS + SPECT/CT; 97.7%, 95.7%, 95.6%, 91.6% and 98.8% for 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. For lesion-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV were 53%, 63.9%, 60.1%, 42.8% and 71.8% for BS; 59.2%, 87.6%, 77.7%, 62.6% and 80% for BS + SPECT/CT; 96.4%, 98.1%, 97.5%, 96.4% and 98.1% for 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT. Conclusion This study has shown that 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT overcomes the limitations of BS and proves superiority in detecting bone metastases, even in patients with SPECT/CT. Our findings present important implications that 68 Ga-PSMA PET/CT can replace BS in future practice.

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

4.2
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