JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kramer, H.
Right arrow Articles by Groen, H. J.M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kramer, H.
Right arrow Articles by Groen, H. J.M.
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Vol. 45 No. 6 995-998
© 2004 by Society of Nuclear Medicine


Clinical Investigations

PET for the Evaluation of Pleural Thickening Observed on CT

Henk Kramer, MD1, Remge M. Pieterman, MD, PhD1,2, Dirk-Jan Slebos, MD, PhD1, Wim Timens, MD, PhD3, Willem Vaalburg, PhD2, Gerard H. Koëter, MD, PhD1 and Harry J.M. Groen, MD, PhD1

1 Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Groningen University Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands
2 Positron Emission Tomography Center, Groningen University Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands
3 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Groningen University Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands

Early discrimination between benign and malignant pleural diseases is vital for the treatment and prognosis of a patient. Imaging is traditionally performed with CT or MRI, with an accuracy of 50%–75%. PET has proven to be superior as a diagnostic tool in several malignancies. In this prospective study, PET results in patients with pleural abnormalities on CT were compared with histologic results. Methods: Eligible patients had pleural thickening on CT and were medically fit for surgical diagnostic procedures. All patients underwent PET. Qualitative assessment led to a PET score of 1 (definitely normal), 2 (probably normal), 3 (probably abnormal), or 4 (definitely abnormal). PET scores of 1 or 2 indicated a negative PET finding, whereas PET scores of 3 or 4 indicated a positive PET finding. Pathologic verification techniques included thoracocentesis, thoracoscopy, or open pleural biopsy at thoracotomy. Results: Thirty-two patients were enrolled, 19 with malignant and 13 with benign pleural disease. PET was true positive in 18 and true negative in 12 patients, with an accuracy and negative predictive value of 94% and 92%, respectively. PET was false negative in a patient with a slowly growing malignant solitary fibrous tumor and false positive in a patient with infectious pleuritis. Median standardized uptake values calculated for 7 patients with malignant and benign pleural diseases were 6.28 and 1.69, respectively. Patients with a PET score of 1 or 2 survived significantly longer than patients with a PET score of 3 or 4. Conclusion: Qualitative assessment of pleural thickening with PET accurately discriminates between malignant and benign pleural thickening, with a high accuracy and negative predictive value.

Key Words: PET • 18F-FDG • pleural diseases • mesothelioma




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ThoraxHome page
British Thoracic Society Standards of Care Committ
BTS statement on malignant mesothelioma in the UK, 2007
Thorax, November 1, 2007; 62(Suppl_2): ii1 - ii19.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2004 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.