Staging accuracy of pancreatic cancer: Comparison between non-contrast-enhanced and contrast-enhanced PET/CT

• Published in: European journal of radiology Vol. 83; no. 10; pp. 1734 - 1739
• Main Authors: Yoneyama, Tomohiro, Tateishi, Ukihide, Endo, Itaru, Inoue, Tomio
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Ireland Elsevier Ireland Ltd 01.10.2014
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Contrast Media; Contrast-enhanced; Female; Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Multimodal Imaging; Neoplasm Staging; Pancreatic cancer; Pancreatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Pancreatic Neoplasms - pathology; PET/CT; Positron-Emission Tomography; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Radiology; Radiopharmaceuticals; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Contrast-enhanced; Pancreatic cancer; PET/CT
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.04.026
• ISSN: 0720-048X

Abstract Purpose Our aim was to clarify the diagnostic impact of contrast-enhanced (CE)18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)–positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) for staging of pancreatic cancer compared to non-CE PET/CT. Method and materials Between April 2006 and November 2009, a total of 95 patients (age range, 36–83 years [mean age, 67]) with primary pancreatic cancer underwent18 F-FDG PET/CT examinations. Diagnostic accuracy was compared between non-CE PET/CT and CE PET/CT. Images were analyzed visually and quantitatively by two blinded reviewers. Reference standard was histological examination in 48 patients (51%) and/or confirmation of an obvious progression in number and/or size of the lesions on follow-up CT examinations in 47 patients (49%). Results For T-staging, invasion of duodenum ( n = 20, 21%), mesentery ( n = 12, 13%), and retroperitoneum ( n = 13, 14%) was correctly diagnosed by both modalities. The ROC analyses revealed that the Az values of celiac artery (CA), common hepatic artery (CHA), splenic artery (SV), and superior mesenteric vein (SMV) invasion were significantly higher in the CE PET/CT group for both readers. Nodal metastasis was correctly diagnosed by CE PET/CT in 38 patients (88%) and by non-CE PET/CT in 45 patients (87%). Diagnostic accuracies of nodal metastasis in two modalities were similar. Using CE PET/CT, distant metastasis, scalene node metastasis, and peritoneal dissemination were correctly assigned in 39 patients (91%), while interpretation based on non-CE PET/CT revealed distant metastasis, scalene node metastasis, and peritoneal dissemination in 42 patients (81%). Diagnostic accuracy of distant metastasis, scalene node metastasis, and peritoneal dissemination with CE PET/CT was significantly higher than that of non-CE PET/CT ( p < 0.05). Conclusion CE PET/CT allows a more precise assessment of distant metastasis, scalene node metastasis, and peritoneal dissemination in patients with pancreatic cancer.