28. Accuracy of Qualitative and Semiquantitative Analysis of 18FDG Positron Emission Tomography Scans in the Evaluation of Primary and Metastatic Lesions

Giorgetti A. , Sorace O. , Pisani P. , Salvadori P.A. , Mariani G.
{"title":"28. Accuracy of Qualitative and Semiquantitative Analysis of 18FDG Positron Emission Tomography Scans in the Evaluation of Primary and Metastatic Lesions","authors":"Giorgetti A. ,&nbsp;Sorace O. ,&nbsp;Pisani P. ,&nbsp;Salvadori P.A. ,&nbsp;Mariani G.","doi":"10.1016/S1095-0397(00)00094-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><strong>Background:</strong> <sup>18</sup>FDG PET scans are often interpreted on the basis of visual estimation of regional tracer uptake. Whether semiquantitative analysis may help clinicians in the recognition of neoplastic masses still remains debated.</p><p><strong>Materials and Methods:</strong> 134 patients with 144 dubious lesions on CT scans (89 pulmonary, 16 hepatic, 39 soft tissue) were studied by means of PET and <sup>18</sup>(F)fluorodeoxyglucose. PET images were qualitatively interpreted by the consensus of two nuclear physicians. Standardized uptake value (SUV) and SUV lean were quantified in both normal and suspicious tissues. SUVs results in the lesion were also expressed as normalized values for the normal mean value in each organ (SUVs/org) and for the overall mean value in normal tissues (SUVs/norm).</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> All patients underwent cytological and/or hystological evaluation of the lesions: 53/144 (37%) were recognized as negative while 91/144 (63%) as positive for primary or metastatic disease. Qualitative analysis resulted in 75% specificity and 93% sensitivity. SUVs, SUVs lean, SUVs/org and SUVs/norm resulted significantly (p &lt; 0.001) higher in positive than in negative lesions by cytology/histology. ROC curves analysis provided optimal cut-off values of 2.5, 0.8, 2.5 and 3, for SUVs, SUVs lean, SUVs/org and SUVs/norm, respectively. Using these cut-offs, specificity and sensitivity resulted 90 and 94%, 83 and 97%, 88 and 93%, 94 and 93%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> Our data suggest that, in patients with CT scan suspicious lesions, visual analysis of PET scans is affected by a high number of false negative results. Semiquantitative assessment of regional metabolic activity has an incremental value and should be used in PET scan interpretation of dubious lesions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":80267,"journal":{"name":"Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T","volume":"3 4","pages":"Page 182"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1095-0397(00)00094-7","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1095039700000947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: 18FDG PET scans are often interpreted on the basis of visual estimation of regional tracer uptake. Whether semiquantitative analysis may help clinicians in the recognition of neoplastic masses still remains debated.

Materials and Methods: 134 patients with 144 dubious lesions on CT scans (89 pulmonary, 16 hepatic, 39 soft tissue) were studied by means of PET and 18(F)fluorodeoxyglucose. PET images were qualitatively interpreted by the consensus of two nuclear physicians. Standardized uptake value (SUV) and SUV lean were quantified in both normal and suspicious tissues. SUVs results in the lesion were also expressed as normalized values for the normal mean value in each organ (SUVs/org) and for the overall mean value in normal tissues (SUVs/norm).

Results: All patients underwent cytological and/or hystological evaluation of the lesions: 53/144 (37%) were recognized as negative while 91/144 (63%) as positive for primary or metastatic disease. Qualitative analysis resulted in 75% specificity and 93% sensitivity. SUVs, SUVs lean, SUVs/org and SUVs/norm resulted significantly (p < 0.001) higher in positive than in negative lesions by cytology/histology. ROC curves analysis provided optimal cut-off values of 2.5, 0.8, 2.5 and 3, for SUVs, SUVs lean, SUVs/org and SUVs/norm, respectively. Using these cut-offs, specificity and sensitivity resulted 90 and 94%, 83 and 97%, 88 and 93%, 94 and 93%, respectively.

Conclusion: Our data suggest that, in patients with CT scan suspicious lesions, visual analysis of PET scans is affected by a high number of false negative results. Semiquantitative assessment of regional metabolic activity has an incremental value and should be used in PET scan interpretation of dubious lesions.

28. 定性和半定量分析18FDG正电子发射断层扫描在评估原发性和转移性病变中的准确性
背景:18FDG PET扫描通常是根据区域示踪剂摄取的视觉估计来解释的。半定量分析是否可以帮助临床医生识别肿瘤肿块仍然存在争议。材料与方法:对134例CT可疑病灶144个(肺部89个,肝脏16个,软组织39个)进行PET扫描和18例(F)氟脱氧葡萄糖扫描。PET图像由两名核内科医生的一致意见进行定性解释。对正常组织和可疑组织的标准化摄取值(SUV)和精益(SUV lean)进行量化。病变的suv结果也表示为每个器官的正常平均值(suv /org)和正常组织的总体平均值(suv /norm)的归一化值。结果:所有患者对病变进行了细胞学和/或生理学评估:53/144(37%)为阴性,91/144(63%)为原发性或转移性疾病阳性。定性分析结果特异性75%,敏感性93%。suv、suv精益、suv /org和suv /norm的结果显著(p <0.001)在细胞学/组织学上,阳性病变高于阴性病变。通过ROC曲线分析,suv、suv lean、suv /org和suv /norm的最佳截断值分别为2.5、0.8、2.5和3。使用这些截断值,特异性和敏感性分别为90和94%,83和97%,88和93%,94和93%。结论:我们的数据表明,在CT扫描可疑病变的患者中,PET扫描的视觉分析受到大量假阴性结果的影响。区域代谢活性的半定量评估具有递增价值,应用于PET扫描解释可疑病变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信