Korean J Urol.  2008 Sep;49(9):775-780.

The Clinical Roles of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography for Urological Disease

• Ryu KH
• Chung HS
• Jung SI
• Kang TW
• Kwon DD
• Park K
• Ryu SB

Abstract

PURPOSE: We evaluate the clinical roles of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computerized tomography(18F-FDG PET/CT) for diagnosing disease in the urogenital tract, and we compared this with the other established radiologic and pathologic diagnoses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
From June 2006 to June 2007, the total number of subjects who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT was 4,438. The mean patient age was 57.4+/-7.6 years and the ratio of males to females was 1.28:1. During the study period, except for 152 patients who had been given a diagnosis of urologic tumor, 614(14.3%) healthy subjects and 3,672(85.7%) patients with non-urologic tumors were enrolled. The results of detecting urologic disease by 18F-FDG PET/CT were compared with the results of detecting urologic disease by conventional imaging techniques and the postoperative histopathological diagnoses.
RESULTS
With including 147 healthy subjects and 251 non-urologic tumor patients, 398 (9.3%) urologic diseases were detected on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Diseases of the kidney, adrenal and prostate were frequently found(215, 95 and 52 patients, respectively). A thorough examination was indicated for 153(3.6%) of the patients as a result of positive findings that suggested possible tumor. A total 93 urologic cancers were confirmed, and the overall positive predictive value of 18F-FDG PET/CT was 60.7%. The positive predictive value for adrenal, kidney, bladder and prostate cancer were 87.7%, 73.3%, 57.1% and 14.0%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
18F-FDG PET/CT was not superior to conventional imaging for making the diagnosis of urologic disease. But 18F-FDG PET/CT was more predictive for adrenal and renal tumor than for bladder and prostate tumor. So, urologic tumor that is incidentally detected on 18F-FDG PET/ CT, and especially adrenal and renal tumor, should be closely evaluated.

Keyword

Fluorodeoxyglucose 18F; Positron-emission tomography; Tomography, emission-computed

MeSH Terms

Electrons
Female
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Humans
Kidney
Male
Positron-Emission Tomography
Prostate
Prostatic Neoplasms
Tomography, Emission-Computed
Urinary Bladder
Urologic Diseases
Urologic Neoplasms
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18

Reference

1. Strauss LG, Conti PS. The applications of PET in clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 1991. 32:623–648.

2. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, Kinahan PE, Charron M, Roddy R, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000. 41:1369–1379.

3. Minamimoto R, Senda M, Uno K, Jinnouchi S, Iinuma T, Ito K, et al. Performance profile of FDG-PET and PET/CT for cancer screening on the basis of a Japanese Nationwide Survey. Ann Nucl Med. 2007. 21:481–498.

4. Bagheri B, Maurer AH, Cone L, Doss M, Adler L. Characterization of the normal adrenal gland with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004. 45:1340–1343.

5. Metser U, Miller E, Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Avital S, Even-Sapir E. ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of adrenal masses. J Nucl Med. 2006. 47:32–37.

6. Blake MA, Slattery JM, Kalra MK, Halpern EF, Fischman AJ, Mueller PR, et al. Adrenal lesions: characterization with fused PET/CT image in patients with proved or suspected malignancy-initial experience. Radiology. 2006. 238:970–977.

7. Kang DE, White RL Jr, Zuger JH, Sasser HC, Teigland CM. Clinical use of fluorodeoxyglucose F-18 positron emission tomography for detection of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2004. 171:1806–1809.

8. Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, Bensadoun H, Regeasse A, Comoz F, et al. Efficiency of [(18)F]FDG PET in characterising renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: a comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003. 30:1236–1245.

9. Bouchelouche K, Oehr P. Positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computerized tomography of urological malignancies: an update review. J Urol. 2008. 179:34–45.

10. Kim GH, Jo MK, Cheon GJ, Lee HM. Clinical role of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for follow-up of patients with renal cell carcinoma. Korean J Urol. 2007. 48:765–770.

11. Lee SW, Jo MK, Lee HM. Clinical role of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for diagnosis and staging of renal tumors. Korean J Urol. 2004. 45:299–302.

12. Martínez de Llano SR, Delgado-Bolton RC, Jiménez-Vicioso A, Pérez-Castejón MJ, Carreras Delgado JL, Ramos E, et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET in renal cell carcinoma. Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2007. 26:19–29.

13. Bachor R, Kotzerke J, Reske SN, Hautman R. Lymph node staging of bladder neck carcinoma with positron emission tomography. Urologe A. 1999. 38:46–50.

14. Drieskens O, Oyen R, Van Poppel H, Vankan Y, Flamen P, Mortelmans L. FDG-PET for preoperative staging of bladder cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005. 32:1412–1417.

15. Jadvar H, Quan V, Henderson RW, Conti PS. [F-18]-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET and PET-CT in diagnostic imaging evaluation of locally recurrent and metastatic bladder transitional cell carcinoma. Int J Clin Oncol. 2008. 13:42–47.

16. Jana S, Blaufox MD. Nuclear medicine studies of the prostate, testes, and bladder. Semin Nucl Med. 2006. 36:51–72.

17. Ahlstrom H, Malmstrom PU, Letocha H, Andersson J, Langstrom B, Nilsson S. Positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and staging of urinary bladder cancer. Acta Radiol. 1996. 37:180–185.

18. Gofrit ON, Mishani E, Orevi M, Klein M, Freedman N, Pode D, et al. Contribution of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography to preoperative staging of advanced transitional cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2006. 176:940–944.

19. Picchio M, Treiber U, Beer AJ, Metz S, Bössner P, van Randenborgh H, et al. Value of 11C-choline PET and contrastenhanced CT for staging of bladder cancer: correlation with histopathologic findings. J Nucl Med. 2006. 47:938–944.

20. Gofrit ON, Mishani E, Orevi M, Klein M, Freedman N, Pode D, et al. Contribution of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/ computerized tomography to preoperative staging of advanced transitional cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2006. 176:940–944.

21. Effert PJ, Bares R, Handt S, Wolff JM, Büll U, Jakse G. Metabolic imaging of untreated prostate cancer by positron emission tomography with 18fluorine-labeled deoxyglucose. J Urol. 1996. 155:994–998.

22. Liu IJ, Zafar MB, Lai YH, Segall GM, Terris MK. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography studies in diagnosis and staging of clinically organ-confined prostate cancer. Urology. 2001. 57:108–111.

23. Chang CH, Wu HC, Tsai JJ, Shen YY, Changlai SP, Kao A. Detecting metastatic pelvic lymph nodes by 18F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with prostate-specific antigen relapse after treatment for localized prostate cancer. Urol Int. 2003. 70:311–315.

24. Yamaguchi T, Lee J, Uemura H, Sasaki T, Takahashi N, Oka T, et al. Prostate cancer: a comparative study of 11 C-choline PET and MR imaging combined with proton MR spectroscopy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005. 32:742–748.

25. Farsad M, Schiavina R, Castellucci P, Nanni C, Corti B, Martorana G, et al. Detection and localization of prostate cancer: correlation of 11 C-choline PET/CT with histopathologic step-section analysis. J Nucl Med. 2005. 46:1642–1649.

26. Igerc I, Kohlfürst S, Gallowitsch HJ, Matschnig S, Kresnik E, Gomez-Segovia I, et al. The value of 18F-choline PET/CT in patients with elevated PSA-level and negative prostate needle biopsy for localisation of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008. 35:976–983.

27. De Santis M, Becherer A, Bokemeyer C, Stoiber F, Oechsle K, Sellner F, et al. 2-18fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is a reliable predictor for viable tumor in postchemotherapy seminoma: an update of the prospective multicentric SEMPET trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004. 22:1034–1039.

28. Hain SF, O'Doherty MJ, Timothy AR, Leslie MD, Harper PG, Huddart RA. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of germ cell tumours at relapse. Br J Cancer. 2000. 83:863–869.