4.7 Article

Consecutive patients diagnostic performance of whole body dual modality 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging for N-and M-staging of malignant melanoma:: Experience with 250 consecutive patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 24, 期 7, 页码 1178-1187

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.5634

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To assess the diagnostic performance of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) using F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) for N- and M-staging of cutaneous melanoma. Patients and Methods This is a retrospective and blinded study of 250 consecutive patients (105 women, 145 men; age 58 +/- 16 years) who underwent FDG-PET/CT for staging of cutaneous melanoma at different time points in the course of disease. Whole-body FDG-PET/CT was performed 101 +/- 21 minutes postinjection of 371 +/- 41 MBq FDG. Diagnostic accuracy for N- and M-staging was determined for CT alone, PET alone, and PET/CT. Results PET/CT detected significantly more visceral and nonvisceral metastases than PET alone and CT alone (98.7%, 88.8%, and 69.7%, respectively). PET/CT imaging thus provided significantly more accurate interpretations regarding overall N- and M-staging than PET alone and CT alone. Overall N- and M-stage was correctly determined by PET/CT in 243 of 250 patients (97.2%; 95% CI, 95.2% to 99.4%) compared with 232 patients (92.8%; 95% CI, 89.6% to 96.0%) by PET, and 197 patients (78.8%; 95% CI, 73.7% to 83.9%) by CT. All differences were significant. Accuracy of PET/CT was significantly higher than that of PET and CT for M-staging (0.98 v 0.93 and 0.84) and significantly higher than that of CT for N-Staging (0.98 v 0.86). Change of treatment according to PET/CT findings occurred in 121 patients (48.4%). Conclusion The diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/CT for N- and M-staging of melanoma patients suggests its use for whole-body tumor staging, especially for detection or exclusion of distant metastases.

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