nach oben

Erschienen in:

11.11.2020 | Special Section: Ovarian Cancer

Diagnostic performance of PET/CT and PET/MR in the management of ovarian carcinoma—a literature review

verfasst von: Mayur Virarkar, Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan, Anjalie Tara Gulati, Sarah Palmquist, Revathy Iyer, Priya Bhosale

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 6/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Ovarian cancer is a challenging disease. It often presents at an advanced stage with frequent recurrence despite optimal management. Accurate staging and restaging are critical for improving treatment outcomes and determining the prognosis. Imaging is an indispensable component of ovarian cancer management. Hybrid imaging modalities, including positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are emerging as potential non-invasive imaging tools for improved management of ovarian cancer. This review article discusses the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer.

CDC (2020) Cancer Stat Facts: Ovarian Cancer. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/ovary.html.

Forstner R, Meissnitzer M, Cunha TM (2016) Update on Imaging of Ovarian Cancer. Curr Radiol Rep 4:31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40134-016-0157-9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Torre LA, Trabert B, DeSantis CE, Miller KD, Samimi G, Runowicz CD, Gaudet MM, Jemal A, Siegel RL (2018) Ovarian cancer statistics, 2018. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians 68 (4):284–296. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21456

Forstner R, Hricak H, Occhipinti KA, Powell CB, Frankel SD, Stern JL (1995) Ovarian cancer: staging with CT and MR imaging. Radiology 197 (3):619-626. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480729CrossRefPubMed

Chung HH, Kang WJ, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, Chung JK, Kang SB, Lee HP (2007) Role of [18F]FDG PET/CT in the assessment of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: correlation with clinical or histological findings. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 34 (4):480-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0260-xCrossRefPubMed

Coakley FV (2002) Staging ovarian cancer: role of imaging. Radiologic clinics of North America 40 (3):609-636. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0033-8389(01)00012-4CrossRefPubMed

Javadi S, Ganeshan DM, Qayyum A, Iyer RB, Bhosale P (2016) Ovarian Cancer, the Revised FIGO Staging System, and the Role of Imaging. AJR American journal of roentgenology 206 (6):1351-1360. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.15.15199CrossRefPubMed

Kemppainen J, Hynninen J, Virtanen J, Seppänen M (2019) PET/CT for Evaluation of Ovarian Cancer. Seminars in nuclear medicine 49 (6):484-492. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2019.06.010CrossRefPubMed

Marzola MC, Chondrogiannis S, Rubello D (2018) Fludeoxyglucose F 18 PET/CT Assessment of Ovarian Cancer. PET clinics 13 (2):179-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2017.11.005CrossRefPubMed

10.

Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, Verzijlbergen FJ, Barrington SF, Pike LC, Weber WA, Stroobants S, Delbeke D, Donohoe KJ, Holbrook S, Graham MM, Testanera G, Hoekstra OS, Zijlstra J, Visser E, Hoekstra CJ, Pruim J, Willemsen A, Arends B, Kotzerke J, Bockisch A, Beyer T, Chiti A, Krause BJ (2015) FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 42 (2):328–354. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2961-x

11.

Lakhani A, Khan SR, Bharwani N, Stewart V, Rockall AG, Khan S, Barwick TD (2017) FDG PET/CT Pitfalls in Gynecologic and Genitourinary Oncologic Imaging. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc 37 (2):577–594. doi:https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2017160059

12.

Risum S, Høgdall C, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Høgdall E, Nedergaard L, Lundvall L, Engelholm SA (2007) The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer--a prospective study. Gynecologic oncology 105 (1):145-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.11.022CrossRefPubMed

13.

Tanizaki Y, Kobayashi A, Shiro M, Ota N, Takano R, Mabuchi Y, Yagi S, Minami S, Terada M, Ino K (2014) Diagnostic value of preoperative SUVmax on FDG-PET/CT for the detection of ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 24 (3):454-460. https://doi.org/10.1097/igc.0000000000000074CrossRefPubMed

14.

Castellucci P, Perrone AM, Picchio M, Ghi T, Farsad M, Nanni C, Messa C, Meriggiola MC, Pelusi G, Al-Nahhas A, Rubello D, Fazio F, Fanti S (2007) Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nuclear medicine communications 28 (8):589-595. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e3281afa256CrossRefPubMed

15.

Rieber A, Nüssle K, Stöhr I, Grab D, Fenchel S, Kreienberg R, Reske SN, Brambs HJ (2001) Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with MR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings. AJR American journal of roentgenology 177 (1):123-129. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.177.1.1770123CrossRefPubMed

16.

Kim C, Chung HH, Oh SW, Kang KW, Chung JK, Lee DS (2013) Differential Diagnosis of Borderline Ovarian Tumors from Stage I Malignant Ovarian Tumors using FDG PET/CT. Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 47 (2):81-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-013-0197-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Fenchel S, Grab D, Nuessle K, Kotzerke J, Rieber A, Kreienberg R, Brambs HJ, Reske SN (2002) Asymptomatic adnexal masses: correlation of FDG PET and histopathologic findings. Radiology 223 (3):780-788. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2233001850CrossRefPubMed

18.

Hubner KF, McDonald TW, Niethammer JG, Smith GT, Gould HR, Buonocore E (1993) Assessment of primary and metastatic ovarian cancer by positron emission tomography (PET) using 2-[18F]deoxyglucose (2-[18F]FDG). Gynecologic oncology 51 (2):197-204.https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.1993.1272CrossRefPubMed

19.

Nam EJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, Kim JW, Kim JH, Kim S, Jung YW, Kim SW, Kim YT (2010) Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecologic oncology 116 (3):389-394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.10.059CrossRefPubMed

20.

Karantanis D, Allen-Auerbach M, Czernin J (2012) Relationship among glycolytic phenotype, grade, and histological subtype in ovarian carcinoma. Clinical nuclear medicine 37 (1):49-53. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e3182291e03CrossRefPubMed

21.

Dauwen H, Van Calster B, Deroose CM, Op de Beeck K, Amant F, Neven P, Berteloot P, Leunen K, Timmerman D, Vergote I (2013) PET/CT in the staging of patients with a pelvic mass suspicious for ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 131 (3):694-700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.020CrossRefPubMed

22.

Yamamoto Y, Oguri H, Yamada R, Maeda N, Kohsaki S, Fukaya T (2008) Preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses with combined 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography. International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 102 (2):124-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.02.019CrossRef

23.

Signorelli M, Guerra L, Pirovano C, Crivellaro C, Fruscio R, Buda A, Cuzzucrea M, Elisei F, Ceppi L, Messa C (2013) Detection of nodal metastases by 18F-FDG PET/CT in apparent early stage ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecologic oncology 131 (2):395-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.022CrossRefPubMed

24.

De Iaco P, Musto A, Orazi L, Zamagni C, Rosati M, Allegri V, Cacciari N, Al-Nahhas A, Rubello D, Venturoli S, Fanti S (2011) FDG-PET/CT in advanced ovarian cancer staging: value and pitfalls in detecting lesions in different abdominal and pelvic quadrants compared with laparoscopy. European journal of radiology 80 (2):e98-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.07.013CrossRefPubMed

25.

Fruscio R, Sina F, Dolci C, Signorelli M, Crivellaro C, Dell'Anna T, Cuzzocrea M, Guerra L, Milani R, Messa C (2013) Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT in the management of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 131 (3):689-693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.09.024CrossRefPubMed

26.

Risum S, Høgdall C, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Høgdall E, Nedergaard L, Lundvall L, Engelholm SA (2010) Does the use of diagnostic PET/CT cause stage migration in patients with primary advanced ovarian cancer? Gynecologic oncology 116 (3):395-398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.12.008CrossRefPubMed

27.

Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Kaji Y, Fukasawa I, Inaba N, Sugimura K (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced CT. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 35 (10):1912-1920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0890-2CrossRefPubMed

28.

Michielsen K, Vergote I, Op de Beeck K, Amant F, Leunen K, Moerman P, Deroose C, Souverijns G, Dymarkowski S, De Keyzer F, Vandecaveye V (2014) Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted sequence for staging of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a clinical feasibility study in comparison to CT and FDG-PET/CT. European radiology 24 (4):889-901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-3083-8CrossRefPubMed

29.

Hynninen J, Kemppainen J, Lavonius M, Virtanen J, Matomäki J, Oksa S, Carpén O, Grénman S, Seppänen M, Auranen A (2013) A prospective comparison of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT and contrast-enhanced CT for pretreatment imaging of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 131 (2):389-394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.023CrossRefPubMed

30.

Lee IO, Lee JY, Kim HJ, Nam EJ, Kim S, Kim SW, Lee CY, Kang WJ, Kim YT (2018) Prognostic significance of supradiaphragmatic lymph node metastasis detected by (18)F-FDG PET/CT in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. BMC cancer 18 (1):1165. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-5067-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Yuan Y, Gu ZX, Tao XF, Liu SY (2012) Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. European journal of radiology 81 (5):1002-1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.112CrossRefPubMed

32.

Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, Naehrig J, Rutke S, Weber WA, Werner M, Graeff H, Schwaiger M, Kuhn W (2005) Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 23 (30):7445-7453. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.06.965CrossRef

33.

Liao S, Lan X, Cao G, Yuan H, Zhang Y (2013) Prognostic predictive value of total lesion glycolysis from 18F-FDG PET/CT in post-surgical patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Clinical nuclear medicine 38 (9):715-720. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e31829f57faCrossRefPubMed

34.

Lee JW, Cho A, Lee JH, Yun M, Lee JD, Kim YT, Kang WJ (2014) The role of metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis on ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in the prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 41 (10):1898-1906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2803-xCrossRefPubMed

35.

Vallius T, Hynninen J, Kemppainen J, Alves V, Auranen K, Matomäki J, Oksa S, Virtanen J, Grénman S, Auranen A, Seppänen M (2018) (18)F-FDG-PET/CT based total metabolic tumor volume change during neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts outcome in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 45 (7):1224-1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-3961-zCrossRefPubMed

36.

Vallius T, Peter A, Auranen A, Carpén O, Kemppainen J, Matomäki J, Oksa S, Roering P, Seppänen M, Grénman S, Hynninen J (2016) 18F-FDG-PET/CT can identify histopathological non-responders to platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 140 (1):29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.10.018CrossRefPubMed

37.

Caobelli F, Alongi P, Evangelista L, Picchio M, Saladini G, Rensi M, Geatti O, Castello A, Laghai I, Popescu CE, Dolci C, Crivellaro C, Seghezzi S, Kirienko M, De Biasi V, Cocciolillo F, Quartuccio N (2016) Predictive value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in restaging patients affected by ovarian carcinoma: a multicentre study. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 43 (3):404-413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3184-5CrossRefPubMed

38.

Chung HH, Kwon HW, Kang KW, Park NH, Song YS, Chung JK, Kang SB, Kim JW (2012) Prognostic value of preoperative metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Annals of surgical oncology 19 (6):1966-1972. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-2153-xCrossRefPubMed

39.

Konishi H, Takehara K, Kojima A, Okame S, Yamamoto Y, Shiroyama Y, Yokoyama T, Nogawa T, Sugawara Y (2014) Maximum standardized uptake value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography is a prognostic factor in ovarian clear cell adenocarcinoma. International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society 24 (7):1190-1194. https://doi.org/10.1097/igc.0000000000000180CrossRef

40.

Risum S, Loft A, Engelholm SA, Høgdall E, Berthelsen AK, Nedergaard L, Lundvall L, Høgdall C (2012) Positron emission tomography/computed tomography predictors of overall survival in stage IIIC/IV ovarian cancer. International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society 22 (7):1163-1169. https://doi.org/10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182606ecbCrossRef

41.

Gallicchio R, Nardelli A, Venetucci A, Capacchione D, Pelagalli A, Sirignano C, Mainenti P, Pedicini P, Guglielmi G, Storto G (2017) F-18 FDG PET/CT metabolic tumor volume predicts overall survival in patients with disseminated epithelial ovarian cancer. European journal of radiology 93:107-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.05.036CrossRefPubMed

42.

Bats AS, Hugonnet F, Huchon C, Bensaid C, Pierquet-Ghazzar N, Faraggi M, Lécuru F (2012) Prognostic significance of mediastinal 18F-FDG uptake in PET/CT in advanced ovarian cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 39 (3):474-480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1984-9CrossRefPubMed

43.

Hynninen J, Laasik M, Vallius T, Kemppainen J, Grönroos S, Virtanen J, Casado J, Hautaniemi S, Grenman S, Seppänen M, Auranen A (2018) Clinical Value of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Response Evaluation after Primary Treatment of Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)) 30 (8):507–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2018.04.007

44.

Martoni AA, Fanti S, Zamagni C, Rosati M, De Iaco P, D'Errico Grigioni A, Castellucci P, Quercia S, Musto A, Ricci Maccarini L, Lopci E, Bernardi A (2011) [18F]FDG-PET/CT monitoring early identifies advanced ovarian cancer patients who will benefit from prolonged neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology (IAR), [and] Section of the So 55 (1):81–90

45.

Ye S, Liu S, Zhou S, Xiang L, Wu X, Yang H (2020) The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT-based quantitative metabolic parameters in patients with ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers 27 (2):189-194. https://doi.org/10.3233/cbm-190904CrossRef

46.

Boers-Sonderen MJ, de Geus-Oei LF, Desar IM, van der Graaf WT, Oyen WJ, Ottevanger PB, van Herpen CM (2014) Temsirolimus and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) combination therapy in breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer: phase Ib results and prediction of clinical outcome with FDG-PET/CT. Targeted oncology 9 (4):339-347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11523-014-0309-xCrossRefPubMed

47.

Berek J, Trope C, Vergote I (1999) Surgery during chemotherapy and at relapse of ovarian cancer. Annals of oncology 10:S3-S7CrossRef

48.

Evangelista L, Palma MD, Gregianin M, Nardin M, Roma A, Nicoletto MO, Nardelli GB, Zagonel V (2015) Diagnostic and prognostic evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography and its correlation with serum cancer antigen-125 (CA125) in a large cohort of ovarian cancer patients. Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association 16 (3):137-144. https://doi.org/10.5152/jtgga.2015.15251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Tawakol A, Abdelhafez YG, Osama A, Hamada E, El Refaei S (2016) Diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/contrast-enhanced CT versus contrast-enhanced CT alone for post-treatment detection of ovarian malignancy. Nuclear medicine communications 37 (5):453-460. https://doi.org/10.1097/mnm.0000000000000477CrossRefPubMed

50.

Hebel CB, Behrendt FF, Heinzel A, Krohn T, Mottaghy FM, Bauerschlag DO, Verburg FA (2014) Negative 18F-2-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT predicts good cancer specific survival in patients with a suspicion of recurrent ovarian cancer. European journal of radiology 83 (3):463-467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.12.006CrossRefPubMed

51.

Risum S, Høgdall C, Markova E, Berthelsen AK, Loft A, Jensen F, Høgdall E, Roed H, Engelholm SA (2009) Influence of 2-(18F) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography on recurrent ovarian cancer diagnosis and on selection of patients for secondary cytoreductive surgery. International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society 19 (4):600-604. https://doi.org/10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181a3cc94CrossRef

52.

Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ, Sun L, Huang G (2009) CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European journal of radiology 71 (1):164-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.019CrossRefPubMed

53.

Ebina Y, Watari H, Kaneuchi M, Takeda M, Hosaka M, Kudo M, Yamada H, Sakuragi N (2014) Impact of FDG PET in optimizing patient selection for cytoreductive surgery in recurrent ovarian cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 41 (3):446-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2610-9CrossRefPubMed

54.

Sanli Y, Turkmen C, Bakir B, Iyibozkurt C, Ozel S, Has D, Yilmaz E, Topuz S, Yavuz E, Unal SN, Mudun A (2012) Diagnostic value of PET/CT is similar to that of conventional MRI and even better for detecting small peritoneal implants in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Nuclear medicine communications 33 (5):509-515. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e32834fc5bfCrossRefPubMed

55.

Peng NJ, Liou WS, Liu RS, Hu C, Tsay DG, Liu CB (2011) Early detection of recurrent ovarian cancer in patients with low-level increases in serum CA-125 levels by 2-[F-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Cancer biotherapy & radiopharmaceuticals 26 (2):175-181. https://doi.org/10.1089/cbr.2010.0872CrossRef

56.

Bhosale P, Peungjesada S, Wei W, Levenback CF, Schmeler K, Rohren E, Macapinlac HA, Iyer RB (2010) Clinical utility of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer in the setting of normal CA-125 levels. International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society 20 (6):936-944. https://doi.org/10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181e82a7fCrossRef

57.

Mangili G, Picchio M, Sironi S, Viganò R, Rabaiotti E, Bornaghi D, Bettinardi V, Crivellaro C, Messa C, Fazio F (2007) Integrated PET/CT as a first-line re-staging modality in patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 34 (5):658-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0306-0CrossRefPubMed

58.

Menzel C, Döbert N, Hamscho N, Zaplatnikov K, Vasvatekis S, Matic V, Wördehoff N, Grünwald F (2004) The influence of CA 125 and CEA levels on the results of (18)F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in suspected recurrence of epithelial ovarian cancer. Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft [et al] 180 (8):497-501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-004-1208-3CrossRef

59.

Pan HS, Lee SL, Huang LW, Chen YK (2011) Combined positron emission tomography-computed tomography and tumor markers for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 283 (2):335-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1404-6CrossRefPubMed

60.

Nasu K, Abe W, Takai N, Tomonari K, Narahara H (2011) Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of patients with epithelial ovarian carcinoma after treatment. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 283 (5):1121-1126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1568-0CrossRefPubMed

61.

Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D, Shields AF, Gareen IF, Hanna L, Stine SH, Coleman RE (2008) Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 26 (13):2155-2161. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.14.5631CrossRef

62.

Kim S, Chung JK, Kang SB, Kim MH, Jeong JM, Lee DS, Lee MC (2004) [18F]FDG PET as a substitute for second-look laparotomy in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 31 (2):196-201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-003-1367-yCrossRefPubMed

63.

Rusu D, Carlier T, Colombié M, Goulon D, Fleury V, Rousseau N, Berton-Rigaud D, Jaffre I, Kraeber-Bodéré F, Campion L, Rousseau C (2015) Clinical and Survival Impact of FDG PET in Patients with Suspicion of Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A 6-Year Follow-Up. Frontiers in medicine 2:46. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2015.00046CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Takeuchi S, Lucchini M, Schmeler KM, Coleman RL, Gershenson DM, Munsell MF, Macapinlac HA, Ramirez PT (2014) Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT in follow-up of patients with low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary. Gynecologic oncology 133 (1):100-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.02.008CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Suppiah S, Chang WL, Hassan HA, Kaewput C, Asri AAA, Saad FFA, Nordin AJ, Vinjamuri S (2017) Systematic Review on the Accuracy of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Management of Ovarian Cancer: Is Functional Information Really Needed? World journal of nuclear medicine 16 (3):176-185. https://doi.org/10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_31_17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Vargas HA, Burger IA, Goldman DA, Miccò M, Sosa RE, Weber W, Chi DS, Hricak H, Sala E (2015) Volume-based quantitative FDG PET/CT metrics and their association with optimal debulking and progression-free survival in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery. European radiology 25 (11):3348-3353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3729-9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

67.

Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, Zangheri B, Aletti G, Garavaglia E, Vigano R, Picchio M, Taccagni G, Maschio AD, Fazio F (2004) Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology 233 (2):433-440. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2332031800CrossRefPubMed

68.

Sala E, Kataoka M, Pandit-Taskar N, Ishill N, Mironov S, Moskowitz CS, Mironov O, Collins MA, Chi DS, Larson S, Hricak H (2010) Recurrent ovarian cancer: use of contrast-enhanced CT and PET/CT to accurately localize tumor recurrence and to predict patients' survival. Radiology 257 (1):125-134. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10092279CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

69.

Kim CY, Jeong SY, Chong GO, Son SH, Jung JH, Kim DH, Lee SW, Ahn BC, Lee J (2015) Quantitative metabolic parameters measured on F-18 FDG PET/CT predict survival after relapse in patients with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 136 (3):498-504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.12.032CrossRefPubMed

70.

Simcock B, Neesham D, Quinn M, Drummond E, Milner A, Hicks RJ (2006) The impact of PET/CT in the management of recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 103 (1):271-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.03.004CrossRefPubMed

71.

Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H, Avril N (2007) Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecologic oncology 105 (1):17-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.10.060CrossRefPubMed

72.

Fulham MJ, Carter J, Baldey A, Hicks RJ, Ramshaw JE, Gibson M (2009) The impact of PET-CT in suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: A prospective multi-centre study as part of the Australian PET Data Collection Project. Gynecol Oncol 112 (3):462-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.027CrossRefPubMed

73.

Bristow RE, Giuntoli RL, 2nd, Pannu HK, Schulick RD, Fishman EK, Wahl RL (2005) Combined PET/CT for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer limited to retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Gynecologic oncology 99 (2):294-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.06.019CrossRefPubMed

74.

Santillan A, Garg R, Zahurak ML, Gardner GJ, Giuntoli RL, 2nd, Armstrong DK, Bristow RE (2005) Risk of epithelial ovarian cancer recurrence in patients with rising serum CA-125 levels within the normal range. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 23 (36):9338-9343. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.02.2582CrossRef

75.

Antunovic L, Cimitan M, Borsatti E, Baresic T, Sorio R, Giorda G, Steffan A, Balestreri L, Tatta R, Pepe G, Rubello D, Cecchin D, Canzonieri V (2012) Revisiting the clinical value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detection of recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinomas: correlation with histology, serum CA-125 assay, and conventional radiological modalities. Clinical nuclear medicine 37 (8):e184-188. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e31825b2583CrossRefPubMed

76.

Khiewvan B, Torigian DA, Emamzadehfard S, Paydary K, Salavati A, Houshmand S, Werner TJ, Alavi A (2017) An update on the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44 (6):1079-1091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3638-zCrossRefPubMed

77.

Subhas N, Patel PV, Pannu HK, Jacene HA, Fishman EK, Wahl RL (2005) Imaging of pelvic malignancies with in-line FDG PET-CT: case examples and common pitfalls of FDG PET. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc 25 (4):1031–1043. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.254045155

78.

Berger KL, Nicholson SA, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA (2000) FDG PET evaluation of mucinous neoplasms: correlation of FDG uptake with histopathologic features. AJR American journal of roentgenology 174 (4):1005-1008. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.174.4.1741005CrossRefPubMed

79.

Liu Y (2009) Benign ovarian and endometrial uptake on FDG PET-CT: patterns and pitfalls. Annals of nuclear medicine 23 (2):107-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-008-0227-zCrossRefPubMed

80.

Ponisio MR, Fowler KJ, Dehdashti F (2016) The Emerging Role of PET/MR Imaging in Gynecologic Cancers. PET clinics 11 (4):425-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2016.05.005CrossRefPubMed

81.

Ohliger MA, Hope TA, Chapman JS, Chen LM, Behr SC, Poder L (2017) PET/MR Imaging in Gynecologic Oncology. Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America 25 (3):667-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2017.03.012CrossRefPubMed

82.

Foti PV, Attinà G, Spadola S, Caltabiano R, Farina R, Palmucci S, Zarbo G, Zarbo R, D'Arrigo M, Milone P, Ettorre GC (2016) MR imaging of ovarian masses: classification and differential diagnosis. Insights Imaging 7 (1):21-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-015-0455-4CrossRefPubMed

83.

Virarkar M, Viswanathan C, Iyer R, de Castro Faria S, Morani A, Carter B, Ganeshan D, Elsherif S, Bhosale PR (2019) The Role of Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Gynecological Malignancies. Journal of computer assisted tomography 43 (6):825-834. https://doi.org/10.1097/rct.0000000000000918CrossRefPubMed

84.

Lee SI, Catalano OA, Dehdashti F (2015) Evaluation of gynecologic cancer with MR imaging, 18F-FDG PET/CT, and PET/MR imaging. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 56 (3):436-443. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.145011CrossRef

85.

Fiaschetti V, Calabria F, Crusco S, Meschini A, Nucera F, Schillaci O, Simonetti G (2011) MR-PET fusion imaging in evaluating adnexal lesions: a preliminary study. La Radiologia medica 116 (8):1288-1302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-011-0720-7CrossRefPubMed

86.

Nakajo K, Tatsumi M, Inoue A, Isohashi K, Higuchi I, Kato H, Imaizumi M, Enomoto T, Shimosegawa E, Kimura T, Hatazawa J (2010) Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging fusion images of gynecological malignant tumors: comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Japanese journal of radiology 28 (2):95-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-009-0387-3CrossRefPubMed

87.

Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Beiderwellen K, Schulze-Hagen A, Heubner M, Kinner S, Forsting M, Lauenstein T, Ruhlmann V, Umutlu L (2014) Diagnostic value of diffusion-weighted imaging in simultaneous 18F-FDG PET/MR imaging for whole-body staging of women with pelvic malignancies. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 55 (12):1930-1935. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.146886CrossRef

88.

Queiroz MA, Kubik-Huch RA, Hauser N, Freiwald-Chilla B, von Schulthess G, Froehlich JM, Veit-Haibach P (2015) PET/MRI and PET/CT in advanced gynaecological tumours: initial experience and comparison. European radiology 25 (8):2222-2230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3657-8CrossRefPubMed

89.

Beiderwellen K, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V, Buderath P, Aktas B, Heusch P, Kraff O, Forsting M, Lauenstein TC, Umutlu L (2015) [(18)F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT for whole-body staging in patients with recurrent malignancies of the female pelvis: initial results. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 42 (1):56–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2902-8

90.

Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Heubner M, Suntharalingam S, Milk I, Kinner S, Heubner A, Forsting M, Lauenstein T, Ruhlmann V, Umutlu L (2015) Implementation of FAST-PET/MRI for whole-body staging of female patients with recurrent pelvic malignancies: A comparison to PET/CT. European journal of radiology 84 (11):2097-2102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.08.010CrossRefPubMed

91.

Kirchner J, Sawicki LM, Suntharalingam S, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V, Aktas B, Deuschl C, Herrmann K, Antoch G, Forsting M, Umutlu L (2017) Whole-body staging of female patients with recurrent pelvic malignancies: Ultra-fast 18F-FDG PET/MRI compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT and CT. PloS one 12 (2):e0172553. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172553CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

92.

Virarkar M, Ganeshan D, Devine C, Bassett R, Jr., Kuchana V, Bhosale P (2020) Diagnostic value of PET/CT versus PET/MRI in gynecological malignancies of the pelvis: A meta-analysis. Clinical imaging 60 (1):53-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.11.018CrossRefPubMed

93.

Grueneisen J, Beiderwellen K, Heusch P, Gratz M, Schulze-Hagen A, Heubner M, Kinner S, Forsting M, Lauenstein T, Ruhlmann V, Umutlu L (2014) Simultaneous positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging for whole-body staging in patients with recurrent gynecological malignancies of the pelvis: a comparison to whole-body magnetic resonance imaging alone. Investigative radiology 49 (12):808-815. https://doi.org/10.1097/rli.0000000000000086CrossRefPubMed

94.

Zheng M, Xie D, Pan C, Xu Y, Yu W (2018) Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/MRI in recurrent pelvis malignancies of female patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nuclear medicine communications 39 (6):479-485. https://doi.org/10.1097/mnm.0000000000000839CrossRefPubMed

95.

Virarkar M, Devine C, Bassett R, Jr., Javadi S, Faria SC, Bhosale P (2020) Update on Diagnostic Performance of PET/MRI in Gynecological Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of the Belgian Society of Radiology 104 (1):4. https://doi.org/10.5334/jbsr.1981CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

96.

Sawicki LM, Kirchner J, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V, Aktas B, Schaarschmidt BM, Forsting M, Herrmann K, Antoch G, Umutlu L (2018) Comparison of (18)F-FDG PET/MRI and MRI alone for whole-body staging and potential impact on therapeutic management of women with suspected recurrent pelvic cancer: a follow-up study. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 45 (4):622-629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3881-3CrossRefPubMed

97.

Nie J, Zhang J, Gao J, Guo L, Zhou H, Hu Y, Zhu C, Li Q, Ma X (2018) Correction: Diagnostic role of 18F-FDG PET/MRI in patients with gynecological malignancies of the pelvis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one 13 (8):e0202314. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202314CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

98.

Delso G, Ziegler S (2009) PET/MRI system design. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 36 Suppl 1:S86-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-1008-6CrossRefPubMed

99.

Wagenknecht G, Kaiser HJ, Mottaghy FM, Herzog H (2013) MRI for attenuation correction in PET: methods and challenges. Magma (New York, NY) 26 (1):99-113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-012-0353-4CrossRef

100.

Ma J (2008) Dixon techniques for water and fat imaging. Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI 28 (3):543-558. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21492CrossRefPubMed

101.

Fowler KJ, McConathy J, Narra VR (2014) Whole-body simultaneous positron emission tomography (PET)-MR: optimization and adaptation of MRI sequences. Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI 39 (2):259-268. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24308CrossRefPubMed

102.

Chandarana H, Heacock L, Rakheja R, DeMello LR, Bonavita J, Block TK, Geppert C, Babb JS, Friedman KP (2013) Pulmonary nodules in patients with primary malignancy: comparison of hybrid PET/MR and PET/CT imaging. Radiology 268 (3):874-881. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13130620CrossRefPubMed

103.

Burris NS, Johnson KM, Larson PE, Hope MD, Nagle SK, Behr SC, Hope TA (2016) Detection of Small Pulmonary Nodules with Ultrashort Echo Time Sequences in Oncology Patients by Using a PET/MR System. Radiology 278 (1):239-246. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150489CrossRefPubMed

104.

Fayad H, Lamare F, Merlin T, Visvikis D (2016) Motion correction using anatomical information in PET/CT and PET/MR hybrid imaging. The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology (IAR), [and] Section of the So 60 (1):12–24

105.

Morgan RJ, Jr., Armstrong DK, Alvarez RD, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Behbakht K, Chen LM, Copeland L, Crispens MA, DeRosa M, Dorigo O, Gershenson DM, Gray HJ, Hakam A, Havrilesky LJ, Johnston C, Lele S, Martin L, Matulonis UA, O'Malley DM, Penson RT, Percac-Lima S, Pineda M, Plaxe SC, Powell MA, Ratner E, Remmenga SW, Rose PG, Sabbatini P, Santoso JT, Werner TL, Burns J, Hughes M (2016) Ovarian Cancer, Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN 14 (9):1134–1163. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2016.0122

106.

Kang SK, Reinhold C, Atri M, Benson CB, Bhosale PR, Jhingran A, Lakhman Y, Maturen KE, Nicola R, Pandharipande PV, Salazar GM, Shipp TD, Simpson L, Small W, Jr., Sussman BL, Uyeda JW, Wall DJ, Whitcomb BP, Zelop CM, Glanc P (2018) ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) Staging and Follow-Up of Ovarian Cancer. Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR 15 (5s):S198-s207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2018.03.015CrossRefPubMed

107.

Thomassin-Naggara I, Balvay D, Aubert E, Daraï E, Rouzier R, Cuenod CA, Bazot M (2012) Quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging analysis of complex adnexal masses: a preliminary study. European radiology 22 (4):738-745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2329-6CrossRefPubMed

108.

Kim JK, Kim KA, Park BW, Kim N, Cho KS (2008) Feasibility of diffusion-weighted imaging in the differentiation of metastatic from nonmetastatic lymph nodes: early experience. Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI 28 (3):714-719. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21480CrossRefPubMed

109.

Buchbender C, Hartung-Knemeyer V, Beiderwellen K, Heusch P, Kühl H, Lauenstein TC, Forsting M, Antoch G, Heusner TA (2013) Diffusion-weighted imaging as part of hybrid PET/MRI protocols for whole-body cancer staging: does it benefit lesion detection? European journal of radiology 82 (5):877-882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.01.019CrossRefPubMed

110.

Lu H, Arshad M, Thornton A, Avesani G, Cunnea P, Curry E, Kanavati F, Liang J, Nixon K, Williams ST, Hassan MA, Bowtell DDL, Gabra H, Fotopoulou C, Rockall A, Aboagye EO (2019) A mathematical-descriptor of tumor-mesoscopic-structure from computed-tomography images annotates prognostic- and molecular-phenotypes of epithelial ovarian cancer. Nature communications 10 (1):764. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08718-9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

111.

Nougaret S, Tardieu M, Vargas HA, Reinhold C, Vande Perre S, Bonanno N, Sala E, Thomassin-Naggara I (2019) Ovarian cancer: An update on imaging in the era of radiomics. Diagnostic and interventional imaging 100 (10):647-655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2018.11.007CrossRefPubMed

112.

Pinker K, Andrzejewski P, Baltzer P, Polanec SH, Sturdza A, Georg D, Helbich TH, Karanikas G, Grimm C, Polterauer S, Poetter R, Wadsak W, Mitterhauser M, Georg P (2016) Multiparametric [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose/ [18F]Fluoromisonidazole Positron Emission Tomography/ Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer for the Non-Invasive Detection of Tumor Heterogeneity: A Pilot Study. PloS one 11 (5):e0155333. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155333CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

113.

Lewis JS, Laforest R, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW, Welch MJ, Siegel BA (2008) An imaging comparison of 64Cu-ATSM and 60Cu-ATSM in cancer of the uterine cervix. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 49 (7):1177-1182. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.051326CrossRef

114.

Tsujikawa T, Yoshida Y, Kudo T, Kiyono Y, Kurokawa T, Kobayashi M, Tsuchida T, Fujibayashi Y, Kotsuji F, Okazawa H (2009) Functional images reflect aggressiveness of endometrial carcinoma: estrogen receptor expression combined with 18F-FDG PET. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 50 (10):1598-1604. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.060145CrossRef

115.

Richard SD, Bencherif B, Edwards RP, Elishaev E, Krivak TC, Mountz JM, DeLoia JA (2011) Noninvasive assessment of cell proliferation in ovarian cancer using [18F] 3'deoxy-3-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging. Nuclear medicine and biology 38 (4):485-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucmedbio.2010.12.003CrossRefPubMed

116.

Turkbey B, Agarwal HK, Shih J, Bernardo M, McKinney YL, Daar D, Griffiths GL, Sankineni S, Johnson L, Grant KB, Weaver J, Rais-Bahrami S, Harisinghani M, Jacobs P, Dahut W, Merino MJ, Pinto PA, Choyke PL (2015) A Phase I Dosing Study of Ferumoxytol for MR Lymphography at 3 T in Patients With Prostate Cancer. AJR American journal of roentgenology 205 (1):64-69. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.14.13009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

117.

Nelson SJ, Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron DB, Larson PEZ, Harzstark AL, Ferrone M, van Criekinge M, Chang JW, Bok R, Park I, Reed G, Carvajal L, Small EJ, Munster P, Weinberg VK, Ardenkjaer-Larsen JH, Chen AP, Hurd RE, Odegardstuen L-I, Robb FJ, Tropp J, Murray JA (2013) Metabolic Imaging of Patients with Prostate Cancer Using Hyperpolarized [1-<sup>13</sup>C]Pyruvate. Science Translational Medicine 5 (198):198ra108. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3006070

118.

Jung TY, Jung S, Ryu HS, Kim IY, Jang WY, Moon KS, Lim SH, Kim DY, Kang SR, Min JJ, Bom HS, Kim SK, Kwon SY (2019) The Application of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Deformed 11C-Methionine-Positron Emission Tomography Images in Stereotactic Radiosurgery. Stereotactic and functional neurosurgery 97 (4):217-224. https://doi.org/10.1159/000503732CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Diagnostic performance of PET/CT and PET/MR in the management of ovarian carcinoma—a literature review
verfasst von: Mayur Virarkar
Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan
Anjalie Tara Gulati
Sarah Palmquist
Revathy Iyer
Priya Bhosale
Publikationsdatum: 11.11.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 6/2021
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02847-2

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Chronische Unterbauch- und Viszeralschmerzen in der Praxis managen"

Springer Medizin

Diagnostic performance of PET/CT and PET/MR in the management of ovarian carcinoma—a literature review

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Update Radiologie

Live-Webinar "Chronische Unterbauch- und Viszeralschmerzen in der Praxis managen"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2021

Comparison of mono-exponential, bi-exponential, kurtosis, and fractional-order calculus models of diffusion-weighted imaging in characterizing prostate lesions in transition zone

Alternative application of percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients with biliary obstruction

Are asymptomatic gastrointestinal findings on imaging more common in COVID-19 infection? Study to determine frequency of abdominal findings of COVID-19 infection in patients with and without abdominal symptoms and in patients with chest-only CT scans

Non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis in autoimmune hepatitis: Diagnostic value of liver magnetic resonance parametric mapping including extracellular volume fraction

Non-occlusive hepatic artery hypoperfusion syndrome and imaging findings: a systematic review

Comparing the productivity of teaching and non-teaching workflow models in an academic abdominal imaging division

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Update Radiologie