乳腺癌前哨淋巴结的鉴别——平面闪烁成像与SPECT/CT的比较

O. Kraft, M. Havel
{"title":"乳腺癌前哨淋巴结的鉴别——平面闪烁成像与SPECT/CT的比较","authors":"O. Kraft, M. Havel","doi":"10.2174/1876388X01204010005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: Assess the role of planar lymphoscintigraphy and fusion imaging of SPECT/CT in sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification in patients with breast cancer. Methods: Planar scintigraphy and hybrid modality SPECT/CT were performed in 223 consecutive women with breast cancer (mean age 59,5 yrs with range 25 - 82 years). In 190 women with a palpable mass radiocolloid was injected in four peritumoral sites and one subdermal injection above the tumour (GROUP A), in 33 women with nonpalpable tumour radiotracer was injected in four subareolar sites (GROUP B). Planar and SPECT/CT images were interpreted separately by two nuclear medicine physicians. Ability of these two techniques to image SLN was compared. Results: In GROUP A the overall hot LN detection rate by planar and SPECT-CT lymphoscintigraphy was 87,9 % (167 patients). In 10 patients (5,3 %), hot LNs were detected only by SPECT-CT. 18 (5,3 %) foci of uptake in 13 (6,8 %) patients interpreted on planar images as hot LNs were found to be false positive non-nodal sites of uptake when further assessed on SPECT/CT. In GROUP B the overall hot LN detection rate on planar and SPECT-CT was 97 % (32 patients). In one (3,0 %) patient hot LNs were identified only on SPECT/CT. Four (6,6 %) foci of uptake in four (12,1 %) patients were found to be false positive when further correlated with SPECT/CT. Differences in detection of SLNs between planar and SPECT/CT imaging in all 223 patients were statistically significant (P< 0.001). Conclusion: In some patients with breast cancer SPECT/CT improves the detection of sentinel lymph nodes. It can image nodes not visible on planar scintigrams, exclude false positive uptake and exactly localize axillary and non-axillary SLN.","PeriodicalId":88754,"journal":{"name":"The open nuclear medicine journal","volume":"4 1","pages":"5-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sentinel Lymph Node Identification in Breast Cancer - Comparison of Planar Scintigraphy and SPECT/CT\",\"authors\":\"O. Kraft, M. Havel\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1876388X01204010005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: Assess the role of planar lymphoscintigraphy and fusion imaging of SPECT/CT in sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification in patients with breast cancer. Methods: Planar scintigraphy and hybrid modality SPECT/CT were performed in 223 consecutive women with breast cancer (mean age 59,5 yrs with range 25 - 82 years). In 190 women with a palpable mass radiocolloid was injected in four peritumoral sites and one subdermal injection above the tumour (GROUP A), in 33 women with nonpalpable tumour radiotracer was injected in four subareolar sites (GROUP B). Planar and SPECT/CT images were interpreted separately by two nuclear medicine physicians. Ability of these two techniques to image SLN was compared. Results: In GROUP A the overall hot LN detection rate by planar and SPECT-CT lymphoscintigraphy was 87,9 % (167 patients). In 10 patients (5,3 %), hot LNs were detected only by SPECT-CT. 18 (5,3 %) foci of uptake in 13 (6,8 %) patients interpreted on planar images as hot LNs were found to be false positive non-nodal sites of uptake when further assessed on SPECT/CT. In GROUP B the overall hot LN detection rate on planar and SPECT-CT was 97 % (32 patients). In one (3,0 %) patient hot LNs were identified only on SPECT/CT. Four (6,6 %) foci of uptake in four (12,1 %) patients were found to be false positive when further correlated with SPECT/CT. Differences in detection of SLNs between planar and SPECT/CT imaging in all 223 patients were statistically significant (P< 0.001). Conclusion: In some patients with breast cancer SPECT/CT improves the detection of sentinel lymph nodes. It can image nodes not visible on planar scintigrams, exclude false positive uptake and exactly localize axillary and non-axillary SLN.\",\"PeriodicalId\":88754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The open nuclear medicine journal\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"5-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The open nuclear medicine journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1876388X01204010005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The open nuclear medicine journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1876388X01204010005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

目的:探讨平面淋巴显像和SPECT/CT融合成像在乳腺癌前哨淋巴结(SLN)鉴别中的作用。方法:对223例乳腺癌患者(平均59.5岁,年龄范围25 - 82岁)进行平面显像和混合模式SPECT/CT检查。在190名可触及肿块的女性中,在肿瘤周围的4个部位注射了放射性胶体,在肿瘤上方的1个皮下注射了放射性胶体(a组),在33名不可触及肿瘤的女性中,在4个乳晕下部位注射了放射性示踪剂(B组)。平面和SPECT/CT图像由两名核医学医生分别解释。比较了两种技术对SLN的成像能力。结果:A组167例患者,平面及SPECT-CT淋巴显像总热LN检出率为87.9%。10例(5.3%)患者仅通过SPECT-CT检测到热LNs。在13例(6.8%)平面图像上被解释为热LNs的患者中,18例(5.3%)摄取灶在SPECT/CT上进一步评估时被发现为假阳性的非淋巴结摄取部位。B组32例(平面及SPECT-CT)热LN检出率为97%。1例(30%)患者仅在SPECT/CT上发现热LNs。当进一步与SPECT/CT相关时,发现4例(6.6%)患者中的4例(12.1%)摄取灶为假阳性。223例患者的平面成像与SPECT/CT成像对sln的检测差异均有统计学意义(P< 0.001)。结论:在部分乳腺癌患者中SPECT/CT提高了前哨淋巴结的检出率。它可以对平面闪烁图上不可见的淋巴结进行成像,排除假阳性摄取,准确定位腋窝和非腋窝SLN。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sentinel Lymph Node Identification in Breast Cancer - Comparison of Planar Scintigraphy and SPECT/CT
Aim: Assess the role of planar lymphoscintigraphy and fusion imaging of SPECT/CT in sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification in patients with breast cancer. Methods: Planar scintigraphy and hybrid modality SPECT/CT were performed in 223 consecutive women with breast cancer (mean age 59,5 yrs with range 25 - 82 years). In 190 women with a palpable mass radiocolloid was injected in four peritumoral sites and one subdermal injection above the tumour (GROUP A), in 33 women with nonpalpable tumour radiotracer was injected in four subareolar sites (GROUP B). Planar and SPECT/CT images were interpreted separately by two nuclear medicine physicians. Ability of these two techniques to image SLN was compared. Results: In GROUP A the overall hot LN detection rate by planar and SPECT-CT lymphoscintigraphy was 87,9 % (167 patients). In 10 patients (5,3 %), hot LNs were detected only by SPECT-CT. 18 (5,3 %) foci of uptake in 13 (6,8 %) patients interpreted on planar images as hot LNs were found to be false positive non-nodal sites of uptake when further assessed on SPECT/CT. In GROUP B the overall hot LN detection rate on planar and SPECT-CT was 97 % (32 patients). In one (3,0 %) patient hot LNs were identified only on SPECT/CT. Four (6,6 %) foci of uptake in four (12,1 %) patients were found to be false positive when further correlated with SPECT/CT. Differences in detection of SLNs between planar and SPECT/CT imaging in all 223 patients were statistically significant (P< 0.001). Conclusion: In some patients with breast cancer SPECT/CT improves the detection of sentinel lymph nodes. It can image nodes not visible on planar scintigrams, exclude false positive uptake and exactly localize axillary and non-axillary SLN.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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