Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Mar 14;21(10):2988-96.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i10.2988.

Cross-modality PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT imaging for pancreatic cancer

Jian Zhang  1 , Chang-Jing Zuo  1 , Ning-Yang Jia  1 , Jian-Hua Wang  1 , Sheng-Ping Hu  1 , Zhong-Fei Yu  1 , Yuan Zheng  1 , An-Yu Zhang  1 , Xiao-Yuan Feng  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Cross-modality PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT imaging for pancreatic cancer

Jian Zhang et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To explore the diagnostic value of the cross-modality fusion images provided by positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for pancreatic cancer (PC).

Methods: Data from 70 patients with pancreatic lesions who underwent CECT and PET/CT examinations at our hospital from August 2010 to October 2012 were analyzed. PET/CECT for the cross-modality image fusion was obtained using TureD software. The diagnostic efficiencies of PET/CT, CECT and PET/CECT were calculated and compared with each other using a χ(2) test. P < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Results: Of the total 70 patients, 50 had PC and 20 had benign lesions. The differences in the sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy between CECT and PET/CECT in detecting PC were statistically significant (P < 0.05 for each). In 15 of the 31 patients with PC who underwent a surgical operation, peripancreatic vessel invasion was verified. The differences in the sensitivity, positive predictive value, NPV, and accuracy of CECT vs PET/CT and PET/CECT vs PET/CT in diagnosing peripancreatic vessel invasion were statistically significant (P < 0.05 for each). In 19 of the 31 patients with PC who underwent a surgical operation, regional lymph node metastasis was verified by postsurgical histology. There was no statistically significant difference among the three methods in detecting regional lymph node metastasis (P > 0.05 for each). In 17 of the 50 patients with PC confirmed by histology or clinical follow-up, distant metastasis was confirmed. The differences in the sensitivity and NPV between CECT and PET/CECT in detecting distant metastasis were statistically significant (P < 0.05 for each).

Conclusion: Cross-modality image fusion of PET/CT and CECT is a convenient and effective method that can be used to diagnose and stage PC, compensating for the defects of PET/CT and CECT when they are conducted individually.

Keywords: Contrast enhancement; Diagnostic imaging; Pancreatic neoplasms; Positron-emission tomography; Staging; Tomography, X-ray computed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A 46-year-old female patient with repeated upper abdominal pain for 9 mo. A-C: PET/CT image [A: Low density lesion in the pancreatic head (depicted by plain CT scanning); B: Increased FDG uptake at the lesion (SUVmax = 2.93, depicted by PET scanning); C: Pancreatic head cancer suggested by a hypermetabolic lesion at the pancreatic head (depicted by a fusion image of PET/CT)]; D-F: PET/CECT fusion image [D: ischemic lesion at the pancreatic head in the pancreatic parenchymal phase (depicted by CECT scanning); E: Delayed enhancement at the head of the pancreas suggested by a slight high density lesion in the venous and delayed phases (depicted by CECT scanning); F: Increased FDG uptake and delayed enhancement of the lesion at the pancreatic head (depicted by a fusion image)]. As the increased FDG uptake could be induced by pancreatitis, this case was diagnosed as chronic pancreatitis via a PET/CECT fusion image, which was confirmed by postoperative pathology. PET/CT: Positron emission tomography/computed tomography; CECT: Contrast-enhanced CT; FDG: Fluorodeoxyglucose.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A 61-old male patient with upper abdominal pain for more than 3 mo. A-B: PET/CT image [A: Enlargement at the junction of the pancreatic body and tail (depicted by plain CT scanning); B: Increased FDG uptake at the lesion with the SUVmax of 10.6. This disease was diagnosed as pancreatic cancer (depicted by a PET/CT image)]; C-D: CECT and PET/CECT fusion image: splenic artery invasion was clearly displayed; the splenic artery was thinner with irregular vascular edges. This case was pathologically diagnosed as a moderately differentiated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with splenic artery invasion. PET/CT: Positron emission tomography/computed tomography; CECT: Contrast-enhanced CT; FDG: Fluorodeoxyglucose.
Figure 3
Figure 3
A 49-year-old pancreatic cancer patient. A-C: CECT images at the arterial phase, pancreatic parenchymal phase, and delayed phase. A tiny, round, low density, 9 mm lesion was found at the posterior right liver lobe (arrow). This lesion was diagnosed as a hepatic cyst by CECT imaging because no enhancement was found in the lesion; D: A PET/CECT fusion image showed increased FDG uptake at the lesion with an SUVmax of 5.2. This lesion was diagnosed as liver metastasis from pancreatic cancer with PET/CECT fusion images, which was confirmed by biopsy; E: PET image for the entire body. A high metabolic mass was found at the pancreatic head (triangle). PET/CT: Positron emission tomography/computed tomography; CECT: Contrast-enhanced CT; FDG: Fluorodeoxyglucose.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:71–96. - PubMed
    1. Li D, Xie K, Wolff R, Abbruzzese JL. Pancreatic cancer. Lancet. 2004;363:1049–1057. - PubMed
    1. Kim MJ, Lee KH, Lee KT, Lee JK, Ku BH, Oh CR, Heo JS, Choi SH, Choi DW. The value of positron emission tomography/computed tomography for evaluating metastatic disease in patients with pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2012;41:897–903. - PubMed
    1. Saito M, Ishihara T, Tada M, Tsuyuguchi T, Mikata R, Sakai Y, Tawada K, Sugiyama H, Kurosawa J, Otsuka M, et al. Use of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with dual-phase imaging to identify intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;11:181–186. - PubMed
    1. Lee JW, Kang CM, Choi HJ, Lee WJ, Song SY, Lee JH, Lee JD. Prognostic Value of Metabolic Tumor Volume and Total Lesion Glycolysis on Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:898–904. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms