Positron emission tomography/computed tomography influences on the management of resectable pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness

Annals of Surgery

Volumn 242, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 235-243

  Heinrich, Stefan ^a   Goerres, Gerhard W ^a   Schäfer, Markus ^a   Sagmeister, Markus ^b   Bauerfeind, Peter ^a   Pestalozzi, Bernhard C ^a   Hany, Thomas F ^a   Von Schulthess, Gustav K ^a   Clavien, Pierre Alain ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b Landeskrankenhaus Feldkirch   (Austria)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CA 19-9 ANTIGEN; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PANCREAS CANCER; PANCREAS SCINTISCANNING; PANCREAS SURGERY; PATIENT SELECTION; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUM CANCER; STANDARDIZATION; SURGICAL RISK; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; TREATMENT PLANNING;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PANCREATIC NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 22744437710     PISSN: 00034932     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000172095.97787.84     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Ferlay J, Bray F, Pisani P GLOBOCAN 2000: cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide. In: IARC, ed. Cancer Base No. 5. Lyon: IARC; 2001.
2. Li D, Xie K, Wolff R, et al. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet. 2004;363:1049-1057.
3. Raut C, Grau A, Staerkel G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with presumed pancreatic cancer. J Gastointest Surg. 2003;7:118-128.
4. John T, Greig J, Carter D, et al. Carcinoma of the pancreatic head and periampullary region. Ann Surg. 1995;221:156-164.
5. Conlon K, Dougherty E, Klimstra D, et al. The value of minimal access surgery in the staging of patients with potentially resectable peripancreatic malignancy. Ann Surg. 1996;223:134-140.
6. Fernandez-del Castillo C, Rattner D, Warshaw A. Further experience with laparoscopy and peritoneal cytology in the staging of pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 1995;82:1127-1129.
7. Annovazzi A, Peeters M, Maenhout A, et al. 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in nonendocrinc neoplastic disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Gastroenterology. 2003;125:1235-1245.
8. Fong Y, Saldinger P, Akhurst T, et al. Utility of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography scanning on selection of patients for resection of hepatic colorectal metastases. Am J Surg. 1999;178:282-287.
9. Staib L, Schirrmeister H, Reske S, et al. Is 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in recurrent eolorectal cancer a contribution to surgical decision making? Am J Surg. 2000;180:1-5.
10. Desai D, Zervos E, Arnold M, et al. Positron emission tomography affects surgical management in recurrent colorectal cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;10:59-64.
11. Ruers T, Langenhoff B, Neeleman N, et al. Value of positron emission tomography with F18-Fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:388-395.
12. Nakamoto Y, Higashi T, Sakahara H, et al. Delayed 18F-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D- Glucose positron emission tomography scan for differentiation between malignant and benign lesions in the pancreas. Cancer. 2000; 89:2547-2554.
13. Diederichs C, Staib L, Vogel J, et al. Values and limitations of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography with preoperative evaluation of patients with pancreatic masses. Pancreas. 2000;20:109-116.
14. Delbeke D, Rose D, Chapman W, et al. Optimal interpretation of FDG PET in the diagnosis, staging and management of pancreatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1784-1791.
15. Hosten N, Lemke AJ, Wiedenmann B. et al. Combined imaging techniques for pancreatic cancer. Lancet. 2000;356:909-910.
16. Beyer T, Townsend D, Brun T. et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369-1379.
17. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500-2507.
18. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, Wahl RL. Direct comparison of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1797-1803.
19. Selzner M, Hany TF, Wildbrett P, et al. Does the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer to the liver? Ann Snrg. 2004;240:1027-1034.
20. Dizendorf EV, Treyer V, Von Schulthess GK, Hany TF. Application of oral contrast media in coregistered positron emission tomography-CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:477-481.
21. Goerres GW, Burger C, Kamel E. et al. Respiration-induced attenuation artifact at PET/CT: technical considerations. Radiology. 2003;226:906-910.
22. Burger C, Goerres G, Schoenes S, et al. PET attenuation coefficients from CT images: experimental evaluation of the transformation of CT into PET 511-keV attenuation coefficients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:922-927.
23. Gold M, Siegel J, Russell L, et al. Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
24. Schafer M, Mullhaupt B, Clavien PA. Evidence-based pancreatic head resection for pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis. Ann Surg. 2002;236:137-148.
25. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without distal gastrectomy and extended retroperitoneal lymph-adenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma, part 2: randomized controlled trial evaluating survival, morbidity, and mortality. Ann Surg. 2002;236:355-66.
26. Richter A, Niedergethmann M, Sturm JW, et al. Long-term results of partial pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head: 25-year experience. World J Surg. 2003;27:324-329.
27. van Geenen RC, van Gulik TM, Offerhaus GJ, et al. Survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma: an up-date. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27:549-557.
28. Frohlich A, Diederichs CG, Staib L, et al. Detection of liver metastases from pancreatic cancer using FDG VET. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:250-255.
29. Rosemurgy AS, Bloomston M, Serafini FM, et al. Frequency with which surgeons undertake pancreaticoduodenectomy determines length of stay, hospital charges, and in-hospital mortality. J Gaslminlexi Surg. 2001;5: 21-26.
30. Gordon TA, Burleyson GP, Tielsch JM, et al. The effects of regionalization on cost and outcome for one general high-risk surgical procedure. Ann Surg. 1995;221:43-49.
31. Porter GA, Pisters PW, Mansyur C, et al. Cost and utilization impact of a clinical pathway for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:484-489.
32. Wagner M, Redaelli C, Lietz M. et al. Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg. 2004;91:586-594.
33. Russell RC, Theis BA. Pancreatoduodcnectomy in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis. World J Surg. 2003;27:1203-1210.
34. Sosa JA, Bowman HM, Gordon TA. et al. Importance of hospital volume in the overall management of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg. 1998;228:429-438.
35. Strasberg SM, Drebin JA, Soper NJ. Evolution and current status of the Whipple procedure: an update for gastroenterologists. Gastroenterology. 1997;113:983-994.
36. Neoptolemos JP, Stocken DD, Friess H, et al. A randomized trial of chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:1200-1210.
37. GITSG. Pancreatic cancer. Adjuvant combined radiation and chemotherapy following curative resection. Arch Surg 1985;120:899-903.