HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: jnumed.108.056382v1 50/4/506    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Related articles in JNM Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zhang, M. Articles by Li, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zhang, M. Articles by Li, B.

The Role of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in the Evaluation of Ascites of Undetermined Origin

Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Biao Li, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Rd., Shanghai, 200025, China. E-mail: lb10363{at}rjh.com.cn

The first aim of our study was to compare the role of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT with that of CT alone in detecting the primary cause of ascites. A secondary aim was to compare the value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT with that of CT alone in detecting abdominal cavity metastasis. Finally, we analyzed the receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curves of maximal standardized uptake values (SUVmax), serum carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9, and CA12-5 for differential diagnostic abilities. Methods: The ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT scans of 40 patients with ascites of undetermined origin, including 30 patients with malignant diseases and 10 with benign lesions, were reviewed for the presence of ascites. Among the 40 patients, 34 had received their diagnosis by pathologic examination and 6 by clinical follow-up. We also assessed the ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT scans of 20 healthy volunteers for comparison. All ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT images were visually interpreted, and the SUVmax was measured. We compared the mean diameter of true-positive lesions with that of false-negative lesions. The diagnostic abilities of SUVmax, serum carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9, and CA12-5 were compared using the ROC curve. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PET/CT in detecting the primary cause of ascites were 63.3% (19/30), 70.0% (7/10), and 65.0% (26/40), respectively, and those of CT alone were 36.7% (11/30), 80% (8/10), and 47.5% (19/40), respectively (sensitivity, P < 0.05). The sensitivity of PET/CT was higher than that of CT alone for detecting abdominal cavity metastasis (86.4% vs. 27.3%, P < 0.01). The SUVmax in patients with malignant primary and metastatic lesions was significantly higher than that in healthy volunteers and in patients with benign ascites (P < 0.05). The mean maximal diameter of false-negative lesions was significantly smaller than that of true-positive lesions (P < 0.05). In ROC analysis, the areas under the curve of SUVmax, serum carcinoembryonic antigen, CA19-9, and CA12-5 were 0.803 (P < 0.01), 0.773 (P < 0.05), 0.552 (P > 0.05), and 0.220 (P < 0.01), respectively. Conclusion: ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT assisted in detecting the original cause of ascites. The differential diagnostic ability of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT was superior to that of CT alone, tumor markers, and cytology. More attention should be paid to peritoneal tuberculosis, which can markedly accumulate ¹⁸F-FDG and mimic peritoneal carcinoma.

Key Words: ascites • cavum abdominis metastases • tuberculosis • ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT

COPYRIGHT © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

Related articles in JNM:

This Month in JNM

JNM 2009 50: 11A-12A. [Full Text]