These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Comparison of CT and 18F-FDG pet for detecting peritoneal metastasis on the preoperative evaluation for gastric carcinoma. Author: Lim JS, Kim MJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, Kim JH, Hwang HS, Park MS, Cha SW, Lee JD, Noh SH, Yoo HS, Kim KW. Journal: Korean J Radiol; 2006; 7(4):249-56. PubMed ID: 17143028. Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the accuracy of CT and (18)FFDG PET for detecting peritoneal metastasis in patients with gastric carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred-twelve patients who underwent a histologic confirmative exam or treatment (laparotomy, n = 107; diagnostic laparoscopy, n = 4; peritoneal washing cytology, n = 1) were retrospectively enrolled. All the patients underwent CT and (18)F-FDG PET scanning for their preoperative evaluation. The sensitivities, specificities and accuracies of CT and (18)FFDG PET imaging for the detection of peritoneal metastasis were calculated and then compared using Fisher's exact probability test (p < 0.05), on the basis of the original preoperative reports. In addition, two board-certified radiologists and two board-certified nuclear medicine physicians independently reviewed the CT and PET scans, respectively. A receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to compare the diagnostic performance of CT and (18)F-FDG PET imaging for detecting peritoneal metastasis. RESULTS: Based on the original preoperative reports, CT and (18)F-FDG PET showed sensitivities of 76.5% and 35.3% (p = 0.037), specificities of 91.6% and 98.9% (p = 0.035), respectively, and equal accuracies of 89.3% (p = 1.0). The receptor operating characteristics curve analysis showed a significantly higher diagnostic performance for CT (Az = 0.878) than for PET (Az = 0.686) (p = 0.004). The interobserver agreement for detecting peritoneal metastasis was good (kappa value = 0.684) for CT and moderate (kappa value = 0.460) for PET. CONCLUSION: For the detection of peritoneal metastasis, CT was more sensitive and showed a higher diagnostic performance than PET, although CT had a relatively lower specificity than did PET.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]