18F-FDG PET/MRI fusion in characterizing pancreatic tumors: Comparison to PET/CT

International Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 408-415

  Tatsumi, Mitsuaki ^a   Isohashi, Kayako ^a   Onishi, Hiromitsu ^a   Hori, Masatoshi ^a   Kim, Tonsok ^a   Higuchi, Ichiro ^a   Inoue, Atsuo ^a   Shimosegawa, Eku ^a   Takeda, Yutaka ^a   Hatazawa, Jun ^a  

^a OSAKA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

18F FDG; Pancreatic tumor; PET CT; PET MRI

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INFLAMMATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NEUROENDOCRINE TUMOR; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PANCREAS TUMOR; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; TUMOR VOLUME; EVALUATION; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHY; SCINTISCANNING; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PANCREATIC NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 80052708663     PISSN: 13419625     EISSN: 14377772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-011-0202-x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. DW Townsend 2008 Dual-modality imaging: combining anatomy and function J Nucl Med 49 938 955 18483101 10.2967/jnumed.108.051276 (Pubitemid 351793435)
2. GK von Schulthess HC Steinert TF Hany 2006 Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions Radiology 238 405 422 10.1148/radiol. 2382041977 (Pubitemid 43134354)
3. JD Soyka P Veit-Haibach K Strobel, et al. 2008 Staging pathways in recurrent colorectal carcinoma: is contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT the diagnostic tool of choice? J Nucl Med 49 354 361 18287263 10.2967/jnumed.107. 048249 (Pubitemid 351355199)
4. G Antoch LS Freudenberg T Beyer, et al. 2004 To enhance or not to enhance? 18F-FDG and CT contrast agents in dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT J Nucl Med 45 Suppl 1 56S 65S 14736836 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXht1arur8%3D
5. AC Pfannenberg P Aschoff K Brechtel, et al. 2007 Low dose non-enhanced CT versus standard dose contrast-enhanced CT in combined PET/CT protocols for staging and therapy planning in non-small cell lung cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34 36 44 16896664 10.1007/s00259-006-0186-3 (Pubitemid 44885552)
6. U Tateishi T Maeda T Morimoto, et al. 2007 Non-enhanced CT versus contrast-enhanced CT in integrated PET/CT studies for nodal staging of rectal cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34 1627 1634 17530248 10.1007/s00259-007-0455- 9 (Pubitemid 47476922)
7. K Kitajima K Murakami E Yamasaki, et al. 2008 Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG-PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35 1439 1448 18418592 10.1007/s00259-008-0776-3
8. K Strobel S Heinrich U Bhure, et al. 2008 Contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT: 1-stop-shop imaging for assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer J Nucl Med 49 1408 1413 18703604 10.2967/jnumed.108.051466
9. Yamamoto S, Imaizumi M, Kanai Y et al (2010) Design and performance from an integrated PET/MRI system for small animals. Ann Nucl Med 24: 89-98
10. MS Judenhofer C Catana BK Swann, et al. 2007 PET/MR images acquired with a compact MR-compatible PET detector in a 7-T magnet Radiology 244 807 814 17709830 10.1148/radiol.2443061756 (Pubitemid 47292092)
11. MS Judenhofer HF Wehrl DF Newport, et al. 2008 Simultaneous PET-MRI: a new approach for functional and morphological imaging Nat Med 14 459 465 18376410 10.1038/nm1700 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXktl2is7k%3D (Pubitemid 351499385)
12. KJ Chang IR Kamel KJ Macura, et al. 2008 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T Radiographics 28 1983 1998 19001653 10.1148/rg.287075154
13. C Matos O Cappeliez C Winant, et al. 2002 MR imaging of the pancreas: a pictorial tour Radiographics 22 e2 11796914
14. Hussain SM, Zondervan PE, JN IJ et al (2002) Benign versus malignant hepatic nodules: MR imaging findings with pathologic correlation. Radiographics 22:1023-1036 (discussion 1037-1029)
15. MT Keogan RR Edelman 2001 Technologic advances in abdominal MR imaging Radiology 220 310 320 11477231 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MvivFSgtQ%3D%3D (Pubitemid 32667164)
16. T Gabata O Matsui M Kadoya, et al. 1994 Small pancreatic adenocarcinomas: efficacy of MR imaging with fat suppression and gadolinium enhancement Radiology 193 683 688 7972808 1:STN:280:DyaK2M%2FmtlSgtw%3D%3D (Pubitemid 24366935)
17. EJ Somer PK Marsden NA Benatar, et al. 2003 PET-MR image fusion in soft tissue sarcoma: accuracy, reliability and practicality of interactive point-based and automated mutual information techniques Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30 54 62 12483410 10.1007/s00259-002-0994-z (Pubitemid 36692893)
18. J Ruf E Lopez Hanninen M Bohmig, et al. 2006 Impact of FDG-PET/MRI image fusion on the detection of pancreatic cancer Pancreatology 6 512 519 17106215 10.1159/000096993 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2s7jtlKjsQ%3D%3D (Pubitemid 46360707)
19. MD Seemann G Meisetschlaeger J Gaa, et al. 2006 Assessment of the extent of metastases of gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors using whole-body PET, CT, MRI, PET/CT and PET/MRI Eur J Med Res 11 58 65 16504962 (Pubitemid 43336943)
20. L Moy F Ponzo ME Noz, et al. 2007 Improving specificity of breast MRI using prone PET and fused MRI and PET 3D volume datasets J Nucl Med 48 528 537 17401088 10.2967/jnumed.106.036780 (Pubitemid 47571406)
21. Y Nakamoto K Tamai T Saga, et al. 2009 Clinical value of image fusion from MR and PET in patients with head and neck cancer Mol Imaging Biol 11 46 53 18769975 10.1007/s11307-008-0168-x
22. AD Vellet W Romano DB Bach, et al. 1992 Adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic ducts: comparative evaluation with CT and MR imaging at 1.5 T Radiology 183 87 95 1312736 1:STN:280:DyaK387ps1ehsw%3D%3D