Can 16-detector multislice CT exclude skeletal lesions during tumour staging? Implications for the cancer patient

European Radiology

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 1066-1073

  Groves, Ashley M ^a   Beadsmoore, Clare J ^a   Cheow, Heok K ^a   Balan, Kottekkattu K ^a   Courtney, Helen M ^a   Kaptoge, Stephen ^a   Win, Thida ^b   Harish, Srinivasan ^a   Bearcroft, Philip W P ^a   Dixon, Adrian K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b LISTER HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bone; Diagnostic accuracy; Neoplasia; Radionuclide imaging; Spiral computed; Tomography

Indexed keywords

MEDRONATE TECHNETIUM TC 99M;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KNEE; MALE; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCINTILLATION CAMERA; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BONE NEOPLASMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFT TISSUE NEOPLASMS; TECHNETIUM TC 99M MEDRONATE; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 33645773432     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-005-0042-z     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Royal College of Radiologists (2003) Making the best use of a department of clinical radiology; guidelines for doctors, 5th edn. RCR, London, UK
2. Medical Device Agency (2002) Eight and sixteen slice CT scanner comparison report. Medical Device Agency, MDA 02059, HMSO, Norwich, UK
3. Murray IPC (2004) Bone scintigraphy in trauma. In: Ell PJ, Gambhir SS (eds) Nuclear medicine in clinical diagnosis and treatment, 3rd edn. Church Livingstone, New York, pp 641-656
4. National Radiological Protection Board (1998) Notes for guidance on clinical administration of radiopharmaceuticals and use of sealed sources. Administration of Radioactive Substances Advisory Committee. National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, UK
5. Savelli G, Maffioli L, Maccauro M, De Deckere E, Bombardieri E (2001) Bone scintigraphy and the added value of SPECT (single photon emission tomography) in detecting skeletal lesions. Q J Nucl Med 45:27-37
6. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU, Treder W, Ruehm SG, Debatin JF, Barkhausen J (2002) Three-dimensional volumetric interpolated breath-hold MR imaging for whole-body tumor staging in less than 15 minutes: A feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:445-449
7. Walker RE, Eustace SJ (2001) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging: techniques, clinical indications, and future applications. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 5:5-20
8. Eustace SJ, Nelson E (2004) Whole body magnetic resonance imaging. BMJ 328:1387-1388
9. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU, Goyen M, Oberhoff C, Debatin JF, Ruehm SG, Barkhausen J (2004) Whole-body MR imaging: Evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology 233:139-148
10. Cook GJR, Fogelman I (2000) The role of positron emission tomography in the management of bone metastases. Cancer 88:2927-2933
11. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, Aramaki T, Morimoto N, Endo M, Furukawa H, Uchida Y, Watanabe J (2005) Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1266-1273
12. Hetzel M, Arslandemir C, Konig HH, Buck AK, Nussle K, Glatting G, Gabelmann A, Hetzel J, Hombach V, Schirrmeister H (2003) F-18 NaF PET for detection of bone metastases in lung cancer: Accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and impact on patient management. J Bone Miner Res 18:2206-2214
13. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G, Zuriel L, Kollender Y, Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Ron I, Mishani E (2004) Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: Initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18F-fluoride PET and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 45:272-278
14. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, Lijmer JG, Moher D, Rennie D, de Vet HC, Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (2003) Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Ann Intern Med 138:40-44
15. Newcombe RG (1998) Improved confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions based on paired data. Stat Med 17:2635-2650
16. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (2001) Guidance for the industry. Statistical approaches to establishing bioequivalence. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER)
17. Newcombe RG (1988) Confidence interval for difference of proportions based on Newcombe-Wilson method. In: EquivTest from Statistical Solutions: Software for statistical analysis of equivalence and bioavailability studies user reference. Statistical Solutions, Saugus, Massachusetts, pp 40-54
18. Farr RF, Allisy-Roberts PJ (1997) Gamma imaging. In: Farr RF, Allisy-Roberts PJ (eds) Physics for medical imaging, 1st edn. Saunders, London, pp 132
19. Medical Services Agency (2003) ImPACT CT patient dosimetry calculator version 0.99 q. Medical Devices Agency, London
20. Groves AM, Owen K, Courtney HM, Yates S, Goldstone KE, Blake GM, Dixon AK (2004) 16-detector multislice CT: Estimation by TLD measurement compared with Monte Carlo simulation. Br J Radiol 77:662-665
21. Mountford PJ, O'Doherty MJ (1999) Exposure of critical groups to nuclear medicine patients. Appl Radiat Isot 50:89-111
22. McDonnell CE (1996) Assessment of the radiological consequences of accumulation and disposal of radioactive wastes by small users of radioactive materials. National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, UK, report no NRPB-M744