A role for FDG-PET in the surgical management of stage IV melanoma

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 11, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 721-722

  Wagner, Jeffrey D ^a,b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Wagner Assoc Plast Reconstr S   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADVANCED CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; EDITORIAL; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MELANOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; NOTE; PATHOLOGY; SCINTISCANNING;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MELANOMA; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED;

EID: 6944237563     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/ASO.2004.06.923     Document Type: Editorial

References (13)

1. Gritters LS, Francis IR, Zasadny DR, Wahl RL. Initial assessment of positron emission tomography using 2-fluorine-18-fluoro-D-glucose in the imaging of malignant melanoma. J Nucl Med 1993;34:1420-7.
2. Steinert HC, Huch-Boni RA, Buck A, et al. Malignant melanoma: staging with whole-body positron emission tomography and 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose. Radiology 1995;195:705-9.
3. Boni R, Huch-Boni RA, Steinert H, et al. Staging of metastatic melanoma by whole-body positron emission tomography using 2-fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose. Br J Dermatol 1995;132: 556-62.
4. Damian DL, Fulham MJ, Thompson E, Thompson JF. Positron emission tomography in the detection and management of metastatic melanoma. Melanoma Res 1996;6:325-9.
5. Deleted in proof.
6. Mijnhout GS, Hoekstra OS, van Tulder MV, et al. Systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of 18F fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in melanoma patients. Cancer 2001; 91:1530-42.
7. Tyler DS, Onaitis M, Kherani A, et al. Positron emission tomography scanning in malignant melanoma: clinical utility in patients with stage III disease. Cancer 2000;89:1019-25.
8. Swetter SM, Carroll LA, Johnson DL, Segall GM. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography for metastatic detection in melanoma patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2002;9:646-53.
9. Holder WD, White RL, Zuger JH, Easton EJ, Greene FL. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography for the detection of melanoma metastases. Ann Surg 1998;227:764-71.
10. Wagner JD, Schauwecker D, Davidson D, et al. Prospective study of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging of lymph node basins in melanoma patients undergoing sentinel node biopsy. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1508-15.
11. Acland KM, Healy C, Calonje E, et al. Comparison of positron emission tomography scanning and sentinel node biopsy for the detection of micrometastases of primary cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2674-8.
12. Wagner JD Schauwecker DS, Davidson D, Wenck S, Jung SH, Hutchins G. FDG-PET sensitivity for melanoma lymph node metastases is dependent on tumor volume. J Surg Oncol 2001;77:237-42.
13. Finkelstein SE, Carrasquillo JA, Hoffman JM, et al. A prospective analysis of positron emission tomography and conventional imaging for detection of stage IV metastatic melanoma in patients undergoing metastasectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;8:731-8.