F-18 FDG PET Scan findings in Patients with Pulmonary Involvement in the Hypereosinophilic Syndrome.
- Author:
Jae Hoon LEE
1
;
Tae Hoon KIM
;
Mijin YUN
;
Jin Hur TAE
;
Sung KIM
;
Sang Jin KIM
;
Hyung Joong KIM
;
Moonsun PAI
;
Young Hoon RYU
;
Jong Doo LEE
Author Information
1. Division of Nuclear medicine, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Korea. ryuy@mail.nih.gov
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
F-18 FDG PET;
False Positive;
Hypereosinophilic Syndrome;
Lung Cancer;
Chest CT
- MeSH:
Collagen;
Eosinophilia;
Eosinophils;
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Hypereosinophilic Syndrome*;
Hypersensitivity;
Inflammation;
Lung;
Lung Neoplasms;
Mass Screening;
Parasites;
Positron-Emission Tomography*;
Tomography, X-Ray Computed;
Vascular Diseases
- From:Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine
2005;39(4):239-245
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is an infiltrative disease of eosinophils affecting multiple organs including the lung. F-18 2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (F-18 FDG) may accumulate at sites of inflammation or infection, making interpretation of whole body PET scan difficult in patients with cancer. This study was to evaluate the PET findings of HES with lung involvement and to find out differential PET features between lung malignancy and HES with lung involvement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: F-18 FDG PET and low dose chest CT scan was performed for screening of lung cancer. Eight patients who showed ground-glass attenuation (GGA) and consolidation on chest CT scan with peripheral blood eosinophilia were included in this study. The patients with history of parasite infection, allergy and collagen vascular disease were excluded. CT features and FDG PET findings were meticulously evaluated for the distribution of GGA and consolidation and nodules on CT scan and mean and maximal SUV of abnormalities depicted on F-18 FDG PET scan. In eight patients, follow-up chest CT scan and FDG PET scan were done one or two weeks after initial study. RESULTS: F-18 FDG PET scan identified metabolically active lesions in seven out of eight patients. Maximal SUV was ranged from 2.8 to 10.6 and mean SUV was ranged from 2.2 to 7.2. Remaining one patient had maximal SUV of 1.3. On follow-up FDG PET scan taken on from one to four weeks later showed decreased degree of initially noted FDG uptakes or migration of previously noted abnormal FDG uptakes. CONCLUSIONS: Lung involvement in the HES might be identified as abnormal uptake foci on FDG PET scan mimicking lung cancer. Follow-up FDG PET and CT scan for the identification of migration or resolution of abnormalities and decrement of SUV would be of help for the differentiation between lung cancer and HES with lung involvement.
