Is contrast material needed after treatment of malignant lymphoma in positron emission tomography/computed tomography?

Annals of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 93-99

  Nakamoto, Yuji ^a,b   Nogami, Munenobu ^b,c   Sugihara, Ryo ^b,c   Sugimura, Kazuro ^b,c   Senda, Michio ^b   Togashi, Kaori ^a  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^b INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AND INNOVATION   (Japan)

^c KOBE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Contrast material; Malignant lymphoma; PET CT; Restaging

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER THERAPY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LYMPHOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LYMPHOMA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIATION DOSAGE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79954449314     PISSN: 09147187     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12149-010-0429-z     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Guay C, Lépine M, Verreault J, Bénard F. Prognostic value of PET using 18F-FDG in Hodgkin's disease for posttreatment evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1225-31. (Pubitemid 39655181)
2. Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C, Petegnief Y, Luciani A, Dupuis J, et al.Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1626-32. (Pubitemid 47572710)
3. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, Ritchie JM, Menda Y, Wooldridge JE, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non- Hodgkin's lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4652-61. (Pubitemid 46224067)
4. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:579-86. (Pubitemid 350002966)
5. Freudenberg LS, Antoch G, Schütt P, Beyer T, Jentzen W, Müller SP, et al.FDG-PET/CT in re-staging of patients with lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:325-9. (Pubitemid 38314075)
6. Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Direct comparison of FDG PET and CT findings in patients with lymphoma: initial experience. Radiology. 2005;237:1038-45. (Pubitemid 41636398)
7. la Fougère C,HundtW,BröckelN, Pfluger T, HaugA, ScherB, et al. Value of PET/CT versus PET and CT performed as separate investigations in patients with Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:1417-25. (Pubitemid 44885407)
8. Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C, Seifert B, Stumpe KD, von Schulthess GK, et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging- do we need contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology. 2004;232:823-9. (Pubitemid 39100269)
9. Gollub MJ, Hong R, Sarasohn DM, Akhurst T. Limitations of CT during PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1583-91. (Pubitemid 47572704)
10. Soyka JD, Veit-Haibach P, Strobel K, Breitenstein S, Tschopp A, Mende KA, et al. Staging pathways in recurrent colorectal carcinoma: is contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT the diagnostic tool of choice? J Nucl Med. 2008;49:354-61. (Pubitemid 351355199)
11. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Domeki Y, Kaji Y, Fukasawa I, et al. Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrastenhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG-PET/non-contrast- enhanced CT and enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl MedMol Imaging. 2008;35:1439-48.
12. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Domeki Y, Kaji Y, Morita S, et al. Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrastenhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent uterine cancer: comparison with PET and enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:362-72.
13. Rodríguez-Vigil B, Gómez-León N, Pinilla I, Hernández- Maraver D, Coya J, Martín-Curto L, et al. PET/CT in lymphoma: prospective study of enhanced full-dose PET/CT versus unenhanced low-dose PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1643-8. (Pubitemid 47545030)
14. Morimoto T, Tateishi U, Maeda T, Arai Y, Nakajima Y, Edmund Kim E. Nodal status of malignant lymphoma in pelvic and retroperitoneal lymphatic pathways: comparison of integrated PET/CT with or without contrast enhancement. Eur J Radiol. 2008;67:508-13.
15. Vera P, Ouvrier MJ, Hapdey S, Thillays M, Pesquet AS, Diologent B, et al. Does chemotherapy influence the quantification of SUV when contrast-enhanced CT is used in PET/CT in lymphoma? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1943-52.
16. Nogami M, Nakamoto Y, Sakamoto S, Fukushima K, Okada T, Saga T, et al. Diagnostic performance of CT, PET, side-by-side, and fused image interpretations for restaging of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med. 2007;21:189-96. (Pubitemid 47387444)
17. Kikuchi M, Yamamoto E, Shiomi Y, Nakamoto Y, Shiomi Y, Fujiwara K, et al. Case report: internal and external jugular vein thrombosis with marked accumulation of FDG. Br J Radiol. 2004;77:888-90. (Pubitemid 39504650)
18. Strobel K, Steinert HC, Bhure U, Koma AY, Gassmann N, Stöckli SJ. Tumour thrombus in the superior vena cava from anaplastic carcinoma of the thyroid:FDG-PET/CT imaging findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:813.
19. Badiee S, Franc BL, Webb EM, Chu B, Hawkins RA, Coakley F, et al. Role of IV iodinated contrast material in 18F-FDG PET/CT of liver metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:1436-9.