Tumor lesion detection: When is integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography more accurate than side-by-side interpretation of positron emission tomography and computed tomography?

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 554-559

  Metser, Ur ^a,b   Golan, Orit ^a   Levine, Charles D ^a   Even Sapir, Einat ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b TEL AVIV SOURASKY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Oncology; Positron emission tomography; Positron emission tomography computed tomography; Side by side

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSIS; ELECTRONS; ONCOLOGY; POSITRONS;

ADDED VALUES; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; CT-SCAN; DIAGNOSTIC CT; EMISSION COMPUTED; LESION DETECTION; LOCALISATION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY/COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIES; SIDE BY SIDES; TUMOR LESIONS;

POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

ABDOMINAL WALL; ADULT; AGED; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DEDICATED IN LINE IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTEGRATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LYMPH NODE; MALE; NEGATIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE; POSITIVE PREDICTIVE VALUE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIDE BY SIDE IMAGING; TECHNIQUE; THORAX; TUMOR; TUMOR DIAGNOSIS; TUMOR LESION; TUMOR LOCALIZATION;

EID: 23044495099     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rct.0000164671.96143.c2     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Delbeke D. Oncological applications of FDG PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1706-1715.
2. Messa C, Bettinardi V, Picchio M, et al. PET/CT in diagnostic oncology. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;48:66-75.
3. Metser U, Lerman H, Blank A, et al. Malignant involvement of the spine: assessment by 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:279-284.
4. Even-Sapir E, Parag Y, Lerman H, et al. Detection of recurrence in patients with rectal cancer: PET/CT after abdominoperineal or anterior resection. Radiology. 2004;232:815-822.
5. Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology. 2004;233:433-440.
6. Messa C, Bettinardi V, Picchio M, et al. PET/CT in diagnostic oncology. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;48:66-75.
7. Ell PJ, von Schulthess GK. PET/CT: a new road map. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:719-720.
8. Jager PL, Slart RH, Corstens F, et al. PET-CT: a matter of opinion? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:470-471.
9. Wahl RL. Why nearly all PET of abdominal and pelvic cancers will be performed as PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(Suppl 1):82S-95S.
10. Pelosi E, Messa C, Sironi S, et al. Value of integrated PET/CT for lesion localisation in cancer patients: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:932-939.
11. Reinartz P, Wieres FJ, Schneider W, et al. Side-by-side reading of PET and CT scans in oncology: which patients might profit from integrated PET/CT? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:1456-1461.
12. Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H, et al. Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: comparison with CT and PET. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4357-4368.
13. Pannu HK, Bristow RE, Cohade C, et al. PET-CT in recurrent ovarian cancer: initial observations. Radiographics. 2004;24:209-223.