Limits...
18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Aim: To compare 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) features in gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.

Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed gastric lymphoma or gastric carcinoma who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT prior to treatment were included in this study. We reviewed and analyzed the PET/CT features of gastric wall lesions, including FDG avidity, pattern (focal/diffuse), and intensity [maximal standard uptake value: (SUVmax)]. The correlation of SUVmax with gastric clinicopathological variables was investigated by χ2 test, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine the differential diagnostic value of SUVmax-associated parameters in gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.

Results: Fifty-two patients with gastric lymphoma and 73 with gastric carcinoma were included in this study. Abnormal gastric FDG accumulation was found in 49 patients (94.23%) with gastric lymphoma and 65 patients (89.04%) with gastric carcinoma. Gastric lymphoma patients predominantly presented with type I and type II lesions, whereas gastric carcinoma patients mainly had type III lesions. The SUVmax (13.39 ± 9.24 vs 8.35 ± 5.80, P < 0.001) and SUVmax/THKmax (maximal thickness) (7.96 ± 4.02 vs 4.88 ± 3.32, P < 0.001) were both higher in patients with gastric lymphoma compared with gastric carcinoma. ROC curve analysis suggested a better performance of SUVmax/THKmax in the evaluation of gastric lesions between gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma in comparison with that of SUVmax alone.

Conclusion: PET/CT features differ between gastric lymphoma and carcinoma, which can improve PET/CT evaluation of gastric wall lesions and help differentiate gastric lymphoma from gastric carcinoma.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma with segmental fluorodeoxyglucose uptake. A-C: PET (left column), CT (middle column) and PET/CT fused images (right column) of a 58-year-old woman with DLBCL (SUVmax 27.4, THKmax 1.9 cm); D-F: A 69-year-old woman with gastric tubular adenocarcinoma (SUVmax 17.1, THKmax 1.0 cm). CT: Computed tomography; PET: Positron emission tomography; SUVmax: Maximal standard uptake value; THKmax: Maximal thickness.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5016379&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma with segmental fluorodeoxyglucose uptake. A-C: PET (left column), CT (middle column) and PET/CT fused images (right column) of a 58-year-old woman with DLBCL (SUVmax 27.4, THKmax 1.9 cm); D-F: A 69-year-old woman with gastric tubular adenocarcinoma (SUVmax 17.1, THKmax 1.0 cm). CT: Computed tomography; PET: Positron emission tomography; SUVmax: Maximal standard uptake value; THKmax: Maximal thickness.

Mentions: The presence of gastric 18F-FDG uptake and SUVmax are summarized in Table 2. Gastric FDG uptake was demonstrated in all 52 patients with gastric lymphoma and in 72 of the 73 patients (98.63%) with gastric carcinoma (P = 0.957). However, abnormal gastric FDG accumulation was deemed present if the intensity of gastric 18F-FDG uptake was higher than the hepatic uptake. Forty-nine (94.23%) gastric lymphoma patents and 65 (89.04%) gastric carcinoma patients had increased gastric FDG uptake. The SUVmax was higher in patients with gastric lymphoma compared with gastric carcinoma (13.39 ± 9.24 vs 8.35 ± 5.80, P < 0.001). With regard to the 18F-FDG PET/CT pattern of gastric wall lesions, the incidence of type I lesions (Figure 1) (P = 0.002) and type II lesions (Figure 2) (P = 0.038) was significantly higher, but the incidence of type III lesions (Figure 3) (P < 0.001) was significantly lower in gastric lymphoma than gastric carcinoma patients. Fu et al[19] suggested SUVmax/THKmax as a valid and practical biomarker in discriminating primary gastric lymphoma from advanced gastric carcinoma. As illustrated in Table 2, SUVmax/THKmax was significantly higher in patients with gastric lymphoma in comparison with gastric carcinoma (7.96 ± 4.02 vs 4.88 ± 3.32, P < 0.001).


18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma
Comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma with segmental fluorodeoxyglucose uptake. A-C: PET (left column), CT (middle column) and PET/CT fused images (right column) of a 58-year-old woman with DLBCL (SUVmax 27.4, THKmax 1.9 cm); D-F: A 69-year-old woman with gastric tubular adenocarcinoma (SUVmax 17.1, THKmax 1.0 cm). CT: Computed tomography; PET: Positron emission tomography; SUVmax: Maximal standard uptake value; THKmax: Maximal thickness.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5016379&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma with segmental fluorodeoxyglucose uptake. A-C: PET (left column), CT (middle column) and PET/CT fused images (right column) of a 58-year-old woman with DLBCL (SUVmax 27.4, THKmax 1.9 cm); D-F: A 69-year-old woman with gastric tubular adenocarcinoma (SUVmax 17.1, THKmax 1.0 cm). CT: Computed tomography; PET: Positron emission tomography; SUVmax: Maximal standard uptake value; THKmax: Maximal thickness.
Mentions: The presence of gastric 18F-FDG uptake and SUVmax are summarized in Table 2. Gastric FDG uptake was demonstrated in all 52 patients with gastric lymphoma and in 72 of the 73 patients (98.63%) with gastric carcinoma (P = 0.957). However, abnormal gastric FDG accumulation was deemed present if the intensity of gastric 18F-FDG uptake was higher than the hepatic uptake. Forty-nine (94.23%) gastric lymphoma patents and 65 (89.04%) gastric carcinoma patients had increased gastric FDG uptake. The SUVmax was higher in patients with gastric lymphoma compared with gastric carcinoma (13.39 ± 9.24 vs 8.35 ± 5.80, P < 0.001). With regard to the 18F-FDG PET/CT pattern of gastric wall lesions, the incidence of type I lesions (Figure 1) (P = 0.002) and type II lesions (Figure 2) (P = 0.038) was significantly higher, but the incidence of type III lesions (Figure 3) (P < 0.001) was significantly lower in gastric lymphoma than gastric carcinoma patients. Fu et al[19] suggested SUVmax/THKmax as a valid and practical biomarker in discriminating primary gastric lymphoma from advanced gastric carcinoma. As illustrated in Table 2, SUVmax/THKmax was significantly higher in patients with gastric lymphoma in comparison with gastric carcinoma (7.96 ± 4.02 vs 4.88 ± 3.32, P < 0.001).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Aim: To compare 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) features in gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.

Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed gastric lymphoma or gastric carcinoma who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT prior to treatment were included in this study. We reviewed and analyzed the PET/CT features of gastric wall lesions, including FDG avidity, pattern (focal/diffuse), and intensity [maximal standard uptake value: (SUVmax)]. The correlation of SUVmax with gastric clinicopathological variables was investigated by &chi;2 test, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine the differential diagnostic value of SUVmax-associated parameters in gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma.

Results: Fifty-two patients with gastric lymphoma and 73 with gastric carcinoma were included in this study. Abnormal gastric FDG accumulation was found in 49 patients (94.23%) with gastric lymphoma and 65 patients (89.04%) with gastric carcinoma. Gastric lymphoma patients predominantly presented with type I and type II lesions, whereas gastric carcinoma patients mainly had type III lesions. The SUVmax (13.39 &plusmn; 9.24 vs 8.35 &plusmn; 5.80, P &lt; 0.001) and SUVmax/THKmax (maximal thickness) (7.96 &plusmn; 4.02 vs 4.88 &plusmn; 3.32, P &lt; 0.001) were both higher in patients with gastric lymphoma compared with gastric carcinoma. ROC curve analysis suggested a better performance of SUVmax/THKmax in the evaluation of gastric lesions between gastric lymphoma and gastric carcinoma in comparison with that of SUVmax alone.

Conclusion: PET/CT features differ between gastric lymphoma and carcinoma, which can improve PET/CT evaluation of gastric wall lesions and help differentiate gastric lymphoma from gastric carcinoma.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus