Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2015  |  Volume : 30  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 314--319

Dual time point fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in differentiation between malignant and benign lesions in cancer patients. Does it always work?


Hussein Rabie Saleh Farghaly1, Mohamed Hosny Mohamed Sayed2, Hatem Ahmed Nasr3, Ahmed Marzok Abdelaziz Maklad4 
1 Department of Clinical Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt; Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Clinical Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt, Egypt
3 Department of Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Nuclear Medicine Unit, Kasr Al Aini Cairo University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt, Egypt
4 Department of Clinical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Sohag University, Sohag, Egypt, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Hussein Rabie Saleh Farghaly
Department of Radiology, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Objectives: Assess the added value of dual time point F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (DTP F-18-FDG-PET/CT) in the differentiation of malignant from a benign lesion in cancer patients. Materials and Methods: Totally, 140 F-18-FDG PET/CT scans of 60 cancer patients who underwent DTP protocol (early whole body PET/CT [E] at 60 min [range, 45-76 min] and delayed limited PET/CT [D] on areas of interest at 120 min [range, 108-153 min] after the tracer injection) were retrospectively reviewed. Visual and semi-quantitative analysis was performed on both early and delayed images. All findings were confirmed by histopathology and/or at least 3 months follow-up (F-18-FDG PET/CT, CT, or magnetic resonance imaging). The result was considered true positive (TP) if delayed standardized uptake value (SUV) of suspicious lesions increased and confirmed to be malignant, false positive (FP) if delayed SUV increased and confirmed to be benign, true negative (TN) if delayed SUV unchanged or decreased and confirmed to be benign, and false negative (FN) if delayed SUV unchanged or decreased and confirmed to be malignant. Results: A total of 164 suspicious lesions were detected (20 presacral lesions, 18 lung nodules, 18 Hodgkin«SQ»s disease (HD) lesions, 16 rectal lesions, 16 head and neck (H and N) lesions, 14 hepatic lesions, 14 non-Hodgkin«SQ»s lymphoma (NHL) lesions, 12 mediastinal lymph nodes (LNs), 10 focal gastric uptake, 10 soft tissue lesions, 8 breast lesions, 4 peritoneal nodule, and 4 others). Sixty-four lesions were pathologically confirmed, and 100 lesions were confirmed based on 3-6 months follow-up. There were 62 TP lesions, 44 FP, 58 TN and no FN results. The overall sensitivity was 100% of DTP F-18-FDG PET/CT in detecting suspicious lesions. The specificity was 57% in differentiating malignant from benign lesions, and the accuracy was 73%. Positive predictive value was 59%, negative predictive value (NPV) 100%. All hepatic lesions were TP. Accuracy in metastatic hepatic lesions HD, presacral soft tissue, lung nodules, H, and N cancer, breast cancer, NHL and mediastinal LN was100%, 88.8%, 80%, 78%, 75%, 75%, 71%, and 33.3%, respectively. Conclusions: DTP F-18-FDG-PET/CT protocol does not always work in differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. However; it has high NPV, and promising results was noted in hepatic lesions, lymphoma, and recurrent rectal cancer.


How to cite this article:
Saleh Farghaly HR, Mohamed Sayed MH, Nasr HA, Abdelaziz Maklad AM. Dual time point fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in differentiation between malignant and benign lesions in cancer patients. Does it always work?.Indian J Nucl Med 2015;30:314-319


How to cite this URL:
Saleh Farghaly HR, Mohamed Sayed MH, Nasr HA, Abdelaziz Maklad AM. Dual time point fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in differentiation between malignant and benign lesions in cancer patients. Does it always work?. Indian J Nucl Med [serial online] 2015 [cited 2020 Jan 29 ];30:314-319
Available from: http://www.ijnm.in/article.asp?issn=0972-3919;year=2015;volume=30;issue=4;spage=314;epage=319;aulast=Saleh;type=0