nach oben

Abdominal Radiology

Erschienen in:

08.03.2018 | Pictorial essay

The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynecologic imaging: an updated guide to interpretation and challenges

verfasst von: Esma A. Akin, Elsa Stephen Kuhl, Robert K. Zeman

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 9/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

All women, during their lifetime, are at risk of developing some form of gynecologic malignancy. The role of FDG-PET/CT has become more established in the management of gynecologic malignancies in the last decade. In this article, we will review the role of FDG-PET/CT in endometrial, cervical, ovarian, and vaginal cancer, by highlighting its strengths and limitations. While the role in initial or pre-operative staging for FDG-PET/CT is controversial, it allows noninvasive detection of equivocal or distant metastases, may alter stage and prognosis, and can guide or help eliminate unnecessary interventions that may not be beneficial. FDG-PET/CT is a useful adjunct to traditional staging with MR and CT.

Avril N, Gourtsoyianni S, Reznek R (2011) Gynecological cancers. Methods Mol Biol 727:171–189CrossRefPubMed

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2016) Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 66:7–30CrossRefPubMed

Plaxton N, Polsani A, Halkar R, Godette K, Barron B (2012) FDG PET/CT utility in gynecologic malignancies: a comprehensive interactive review of anatomy, pathways of metastatic spread and scan findings. J Nucl Med 53:1067

Nogami Y, Iida M, Banno K, et al. (2014) Application of FDG-PET in cervical cancer and endometrial cancer: utility and future prospects. Anticancer Res 34:585–592PubMed

Rockall AG, Cross S, Flanagan S, Moore E, Avril N (2012) The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynaecological cancers. Cancer Imaging 12:49–65CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sharma P, Kumar R, Singh H, et al. (2012) Carcinoma endometrium: role of 18-FDG PET/CT for detection of suspected recurrence. Clin Nucl Med 37:649–655CrossRefPubMed

Lioupis M, Syrmos N (2016) Nuclear Medicine and its promising applications in gynecological cancers. Hell J Nucl Med 19:63PubMed

Micco M, Sala E, Lakhman Y, Hricak H, Vargas HA (2014) Role of imaging in the pretreatment evaluation of common gynecological cancers. Womens Health (Lond) 10:299–321CrossRef

NCCN Practice Guidelines Narrative Summary of Indications for FDG PET and PET/ CT. 2/14/2016 ed2016.

10.

Prat J (2015) Oncology FCoG. FIGO’s staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: abridged republication. J Gynecol Oncol 26:87–89CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Kitajima K, Murakami K, Kaji Y, Sugimura K (2010) Spectrum of FDG PET/CT findings of uterine tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:737–743CrossRefPubMed

12.

Park JY, Kim EN, Kim DY, et al. (2008) Comparison of the validity of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the preoperative evaluation of patients with uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol 108:486–492CrossRefPubMed

13.

Picchio M, Mangili G, Samanes Gajate AM, et al. (2010) High-grade endometrial cancer: value of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT in preoperative staging. Nucl Med Commun 31:506–512PubMed

14.

Kang SY, Cheon GJ, Lee M, et al. (2017) Prediction of recurrence by preoperative intratumoral FDG uptake heterogeneity in endometrioid endometrial cancer. Transl Oncol 10:178–183CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F, et al. (2008) Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1707–1716CrossRefPubMed

16.

Freeman SJ, Aly AM, Kataoka MY, et al. (2012) The revised FIGO staging system for uterine malignancies: implications for MR imaging. Radiographics 32:1805–1827CrossRefPubMed

17.

Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Kaji Y, Sugimura K (2009) Accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with uterine cancer. Eur Radiol 19:1529–1536CrossRefPubMed

18.

Nakahara T, Fujii H, Ide M, et al. (2001) F-18 FDG uptake in endometrial cancer. Clin Nucl Med 26:82–83CrossRefPubMed

19.

Chander S, Meltzer CC, McCook BM (2002) Physiologic uterine uptake of FDG during menstruation demonstrated with serial combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Clin Nucl Med 27:22–24CrossRefPubMed

20.

Lerman H, Metser U, Grisaru D, et al. (2004) Normal and abnormal 18F-FDG endometrial and ovarian uptake in pre- and postmenopausal patients: assessment by PET/CT. J Nucl Med 45:266–271PubMed

21.

Peltomaki P, Butzow R (2011) Pathogenesis of endometriosis and its relationship to gynecological cancers. Epigenomics 3:689–690CrossRefPubMed

22.

Saga T, Higashi T, Ishimori T, et al. (2003) Clinical value of FDG-PET in the follow up of post-operative patients with endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med 17:197–203CrossRefPubMed

23.

Survival rates for Ovarian Cancer by Stage. 2016.

24.

Tjalma WA, Carp L, De Beeck BO (2004) False-positive positron emission tomographic scan and computed tomography for recurrent vaginal cancer: pitfalls of modern imaging techniques. Gynecol Oncol 92:726–728CrossRefPubMed

25.

Fenchel S, Grab D, Nuessle K, et al. (2002) Asymptomatic adnexal masses: correlation of FDG PET and histopathologic findings. Radiology 223:780–788CrossRefPubMed

26.

Castellucci P, Perrone AM, Picchio M, et al. (2007) Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nucl Med Commun 28:589–595CrossRefPubMed

27.

Grab D, Flock F, Stohr I, et al. (2000) Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Gynecol Oncol 77:454–459CrossRefPubMed

28.

Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K, et al. (2004) Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:227–233CrossRefPubMed

29.

Havrilesky LJ, Kulasingam SL, Matchar DB, Myers ER (2005) FDG-PET for management of cervical and ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 97:183–191CrossRefPubMed

30.

Woodward PJ, Hosseinzadeh K, Saenger JS (2004) From the archives of the AFIP. Radiographics 24:225–246CrossRefPubMed

31.

Keidar Z, Amit A, Lowenstein L, Israel O (2015) The role of FDG-PET/CT in predicting secondary optimal debuling in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. J Nucl Med 56:1346

32.

Miller DS, Spirtos NM, Ballon SC, et al. (1992) Critical reassessment of second-look exploratory laparotomy for epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Minimal diagnostic and therapeutic value in patients with persistent cancer. Cancer 69:502–510CrossRefPubMed

33.

Kubik-Huch RA, Dorffler W, von Schulthess GK, et al. (2000) Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Eur Radiol 10:761–767CrossRefPubMed

34.

Schwarz JK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Delbeke D (2009) The role of 18F-FDG PET in assessing therapy response in cancer of the cervix and ovaries. J Nucl Med 50:64S–73SCrossRefPubMed

35.

Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, et al. (2005) Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7445–7453CrossRefPubMed

36.

Rose PG, Faulhaber P, Miraldi F, Abdul-Karim FW (2001) Positive emission tomography for evaluating a complete clinical response in patients with ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma: correlation with second-look laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 82:17–21CrossRefPubMed

37.

Markowitz LE, Unger ER, Saraiya M (2009) Primary and secondary prevention of cervical cancer–opportunities and challenges. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:439–440CrossRefPubMed

38.

Togashi K, Morikawa K, Kataoka ML, Konishi J (1998) Cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 8:391–397CrossRefPubMed

39.

Dehdashti F, Siegel BA (2010) Gynecological tumors. In: Delbeke D, Israel O (eds) Hybrid PET/CT and SPECT/CT imaging: a teaching file. New York: Springer, pp 383–408CrossRef

40.

Pandit-Taskar N (2005) Oncologic imaging in gynecologic malignancies. J Nucl Med 46:1842–1850PubMed

41.

Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F (2001) Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 19:3745–3749CrossRefPubMed

42.

Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. (2010) Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol 28:2108–2113CrossRefPubMed

43.

Lukka H, Hirte H, Fyles A, et al. (2002) Concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy plus radiotherapy for cervical cancer–a meta-analysis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 14:203–212CrossRef

44.

About Gynecologic Cancers—Foundation for Women’s Cancer. 2017. at http://www.foundationforwomenscancer.org/about-gynecologic-cancers/.)

45.

Bodurka-Bevers D, Morris M, Eifel PJ, et al. (2000) Posttherapy surveillance of women with cervical cancer: an outcomes analysis. Gynecol Oncol 78:187–193CrossRefPubMed

46.

Jacobs AJ, Faris C, Perez CA, et al. (1986) Short-term persistence of carcinoma of the uterine cervix after radiation. An indicator of long-term prognosis. Cancer 57:944–950CrossRefPubMed

47.

Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW (2007) Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. JAMA 298:2289–2295CrossRefPubMed

48.

Lamoreaux WT, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, et al. (2005) FDG-PET evaluation of vaginal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:733–737CrossRefPubMed

49.

Koh WJ, Greer BE, Abu-Rustum NR, et al. (2017) Vulvar cancer, version 1.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 15:92–120CrossRef

50.

Cohn DE, Dehdashti F, Gibb RK, et al. (2002) Prospective evaluation of positron emission tomography for the detection of groin node metastases from vulvar cancer. Gynecol Oncol 85:179–184CrossRefPubMed

51.

Vaginal Cancer Treatment (PDQ(R)): Health Professional Version. PDQ Cancer Information Summaries. Bethesda (MD)2002.

52.

Robertson NL, Hricak H, Sonoda Y, et al. (2016) The impact of FDG-PET/CT in the management of patients with vulvar and vaginal cancer. Gynecol Oncol 140:420–424CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynecologic imaging: an updated guide to interpretation and challenges
verfasst von: Esma A. Akin
Elsa Stephen Kuhl
Robert K. Zeman
Publikationsdatum: 08.03.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 9/2018
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1441-8

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

18.04.2024 | Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin | Nachrichten

Update Radiologie

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

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynecologic imaging: an updated guide to interpretation and challenges

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen

Update Radiologie

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2018

Hepatobiliary phase liver MR imaging findings after Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in cancer patients

Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of peripelvic and periureteric pathologies

Spleen enlargement assessment using computed tomography: which coefficient correlates the strongest with the real volume of the spleen?

Percutaneous microwave ablation for local control of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Diagnostic performances of intravoxel incoherent motion and conventional diffusion-weighted imaging in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant portal vein thrombus

The “perinephric cobwebs” sign

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen

Update Radiologie