JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


First published online September 15, 2008
J Nucl Med 2008, doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.052373
© 2008 by Society of Nuclear Medicine
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Publish Ahead of Print[PDF])
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jnumed.108.052373v1
49/10/1613    most recent
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ilias, I.
Right arrow Articles by Pacak, K.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ilias, I.
Right arrow Articles by Pacak, K.


Comparison of 6-18F-Fluorodopamine PET with 123I-Metaiodobenzylguanidine and 111In-Pentetreotide Scintigraphy in Localization of Nonmetastatic and Metastatic Pheochromocytoma

Ioannis Ilias 1, Clara C. Chen 2, Jorge A. Carrasquillo 2, Millie Whatley 2, Alexander Ling 3, Ivica Lazúrová 4, Karen T. Adams 1, Shiromi Perera 1, and Karel Pacak 1*

1 Reproductive Biology and Adult Endocrinology Program, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
2 Nuclear Medicine Department, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
3 Department of Radiology, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
4 Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, P.J. Safárik University, Kosice, Slovak Republic

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: karel{at}mail.nih.gov.


   Abstract

We compared functional imaging modalities including PET with 6-18F-fluorodopamine (18F-DA) with 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (123I-MIBG) and somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with 111In-pentetreotide in nonmetastatic and metastatic pheochromocytoma (PHEO). Methods: We studied 25 men and 28 women (mean age ± SD, 44.2 ± 14.2 y) with biochemically proven nonmetastatic (n = 17) or metastatic (n = 36) PHEO. Evaluation included anatomic imaging with CT or MRI and functional imaging that included at least 2 nuclear medicine modalities: 18F-DA PET, 123I-MIBG scintigraphy, or SRS. Sensitivity of functional imaging versus anatomic imaging was assessed on a per-patient and a per-region basis. Results: For this available cohort, on a per-patient basis overall sensitivity (combined for nonmetastatic and metastatic PHEO) was 90.2% for 18F-DA PET, 76.0% for 123I-MIBG scintigraphy, and 22.0% for SRS. On a per-region basis, overall sensitivity was 75.4% for 18F-DA PET, 63.4% for 123I-MIBG scintigraphy, and 64.0% for SRS. Conclusion: If available, 18F-DA PET should be used in the evaluation of PHEO, because it is more sensitive than 123I-MIBG scintigraphy or SRS. If 18F-DA PET is not available, 123I-MIBG scintigraphy (for nonmetastatic or adrenal PHEO) and SRS (for metastatic PHEO) should be the first alternative imaging methods to be used.

Key Words: radionuclide imaging, 18F-fluorodopamine, 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine, 111In-pentetreotide, pheochromocytoma







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2008 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.