Comparison of 6-18F-fluorodopamine PET with 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine and 111in-pentetreotide scintigraphy in localization of nonmetastatic and metastatic pheochromocytoma.
Comparison of 6-18F-fluorodopamine PET with 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine and 111in-pentetreotide scintigraphy in localization of nonmetastatic and metastatic pheochromocytoma.
复制标题
DOI:
10.2967/jnumed.108.052373
复制
发表时间:
2008-10
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Pacak K
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Ilias I;Chen CC;Carrasquillo JA;Whatley M;Ling A;Lazúrová I;Adams KT;Perera S;Pacak K
We compared functional imaging modalities including positron emission tomography (PET) with 6-[18F]-fluorodopamine ([18F]-DA) against [123I]-metaiodobenzylguanidine ([123I]-MIBG) and somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with [111In]-pentetreotide (Octreoscan) in non-metastatic and metastatic pheochromocytoma (PHEO). Methods: We studied 25 men and 28 women (mean age±SD: 44.2±14.2 years) with biochemically-proven non-metastatic (n: 17) or metastatic (n: 36) PHEO. Evaluation included anatomical imaging with computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and functional imaging that included at least two nuclear medicine modalities: [18F]-DA PET, [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy, or SRS. Sensitivity of functional imaging vs. anatomical imaging was assessed on a per-patient and on a per-region basis. For this available cohort, on a per patient basis, overall sensitivity (combined for non-metastatic and metastatic PHEO) was 90.2% for [18F]-DA PET, 76.0% for [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy, and 22.0% for SRS. On a per-region basis, overall sensitivity was 75.4% for [18F]-DA PET, 63.4% for [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy, and 64.0% for SRS. If available, [18F]-DA PET should be used in the evaluation of PHEO, since it is more sensitive than [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy or SRS. If [18F]-DA PET is not available, [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy (for non-metastatic/adrenal PHEO) and SRS (for metastatic PHEO) should be the first alternative imaging methods to be used.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
1.5
作者:
Mamede, M;Carrasquillo, JA;Pacak, K
通讯作者:
Pacak, K
影响因子:
19.7
作者:
Hoegerle, S;Nitzsche, E;Neumann, HPH
通讯作者:
Neumann, HPH
影响因子:
20.3
作者:
BRAVO, EL
通讯作者:
BRAVO, EL
影响因子:
10.6
作者:
Fujita, A;Hyodoh, H;Kanazawa, K
通讯作者:
Kanazawa, K
影响因子:
5.8
作者:
Ilias, I;Yu, J;Pacak, K
通讯作者:
Pacak, K