4.7 Article

The Prognostic and Diagnostic Value of [18F]FDG PET/CT in Untreated Laryngeal Carcinoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12103514

关键词

PET/CT; semiquantitative PET parameters; laryngeal squamous-cell carcinoma; metastatic lymph node; [F-18]FDG PET/CT vs. neck MRI; MTV; TLG

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of PET/CT and neck MRI in patients with laryngeal carcinoma and investigate the predictive value of PET/CT for survival outcomes. The results showed that PET/CT had higher sensitivity and accuracy for nodal metastasis than MRI. Additionally, PET parameters were significant prognostic factors for overall survival and progression-free survival. The study concluded that PET/CT improves nodal staging accuracy and provides valuable information for survival prognostication in laryngeal carcinoma.
This study aims to determine the diagnostic accuracy of staging PET/CT and neck MRI in patients with laryngeal carcinoma and to assess the value of PET/CT in predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Sixty-eight patients who had both modalities performed before treatment between 2014 and 2021 were included in this study. The sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT and MRI were evaluated. PET/CT had 93.8% sensitivity, 58.3% specificity, and 75% accuracy for nodal metastasis, whereas MRI had 68.8%, 61.1%, and 64.7% accuracy, respectively. At a median follow-up of 51 months, 23 patients had developed disease progression and 17 patients had died. Univariate-survival analysis revealed all utilized PET parameters as significant prognostic factors for OS and PFS (p-value < 0.03 each). In multivariate analysis, metabolic-tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) predicted better PFS (p-value < 0.05 each). In conclusion, PET/CT improves the accuracy of nodal staging in laryngeal carcinoma over neck MRI and adds to the prognostication of survival outcomes through the use of several PET metrics.

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

4.7
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