Bone Positron Emission Tomography with or without CT Is More Accurate than Bone Scan for Detection of Bone Metastasis.
10.3348/kjr.2013.14.3.510
- Author:
Soo Jin LEE
1
;
Won Woo LEE
;
Sang Eun KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam 463-707, Korea. wwlee@snu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Keywords:
Na18F;
Positron emission tomography;
Positron emission tomography/computed tomography;
99mTc-HDP;
Bone scan;
Bone metastasis
- MeSH:
Adult;
Aged;
Aged, 80 and over;
Area Under Curve;
Bone Neoplasms/*radionuclide imaging/*secondary;
Diphosphonates/diagnostic use;
Female;
Fluorine Radioisotopes/diagnostic use;
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/diagnostic use;
Humans;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Multimodal Imaging/methods;
Organotechnetium Compounds/diagnostic use;
Positron-Emission Tomography/*methods;
Retrospective Studies;
Sensitivity and Specificity;
Sodium/diagnostic use;
Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods
- From:Korean Journal of Radiology
2013;14(3):510-519
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: Na18F bone positron emission tomography (bone PET) is a new imaging modality which is useful for the evaluation of bone diseases. Here, we compared the diagnostic accuracies between bone PET and bone scan for the detection of bone metastasis (BM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen cancer patients (M:F = 10:6, mean age = 60 +/- 12 years) who underwent both bone PET and bone scan were analyzed. Bone PET was conducted 30 minutes after the injection of 370 MBq Na18F, and a bone scan was performed 3 hours after the injection of 1295 MBq 99mTc-hydroxymethylene diphosphonate. RESULTS: In the patient-based analysis (8 patients with BM and 8 without BM), the sensitivities of bone PET (100% = 8/8) and bone scan (87.5% = 7/8) were not significantly different (p > 0.05), whereas the specificity of bone PET (87.5% = 7/8) was significantly greater than that of the bone scan (25% = 2/8) (p < 0.05). In the lesion-based analysis (43 lesions in 14 patients; 31 malignant and 12 benign), the sensitivity of bone PET (100% = 31/31) was significantly greater than that of bone scan (38.7% = 12/31) (p < 0.01), and the specificity of bone PET (75.0% = 9/12) was also significantly higher than that of bone scan (8.3% = 1/12) (p < 0.05). The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that bone PET was significantly more accurate than the bone scan in the patient (p = 0.0306) and lesion (p = 0.0001) based analyses. CONCLUSION: Na18F bone PET is more accurate than bone scan for BM evaluation.
