medigraphic.com
Órgano Oficial del Hospital Angeles Health System

2006, Number 3

Next >>

Acta Med 2006; 4 (3)

The use of positron emision tomography with computed tomography in pediatric oncology

Ruano AJM, Palafox SR, García BN

Language: Spanish
References: 46
Page: 153-163
PDF size: 182.47 Kb.


ABSTRACT

There are many imaging methods used for diagnosis in oncologic surgery. The most recent technique adopted is the Positron Emission Tomography combined with Computed Tomography (PET CT). There is no evidence of the advantage of this method in pediatric oncology, despite the applications are growing progresively. Of all the adult cancers to which PET CT has been applied only two are present in the pediatric population. The rest of the oncologic pathology of adults is unusual in pediatrics. This is why the statistic data of PET CT in adults is not valid in pediatric patients. We performed a retrospective, descriptive study of pediatric oncologic patients that underwent a PET CT study. The purpose of this study was 1) Staging of malignancies before medical or surgical treatment, 2) Searching for residual tumors after adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and for metastases, 3) For follow up and early detection of recurrence of cancer following therapeutic interventions, 4) Differential diagnosis between benign an malignant tumors.


REFERENCES

  1. Scanner EG, Chang AE, Doppman JL, Conkle DM, Foie MW, Rosenberg SA. Comparison of computed and conventional whole lung tomography in detecting pulmonary nodules: a prospective radiologic-pathologic study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978; 131: 51-4.

  2. Muhm JR, Brown LR, Crowe JK, Sheedy II PF, Hattery RR, Stephens DH. Comparison of whole lung tomography and computed tomography for detecting pulmonary nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978; 131: 981-4.

  3. Crim JR, Cracchiolo A, Bassett LW, Seeger LL, Soma CA, Chatelaine A. Magnetic resonance imaging of the hindfoot. Foot Ankle 1989; 10: 1-7.

  4. Stark DD, Wittenberg J, Butch RJ, Ferruci Jr JT. Hepatic metastases: randomized, controlled comparison of detection with MR imaging and CT. Radiology 1987; 165: 399-406.

  5. Alavi A, Lakhani P, Mavi A, Kung JW, Zhuang H. PET: a revolution in medical imaging. Radiol Clin N Am 2004; 42: 983-1001.

  6. Warburg O. The Metabolism of Tumors. New York: Smith; 1931.

  7. Hawking RA, Hoh CK, Dahlbom M et al. PET cancer evaluations with FDG. J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 1555-1558.

  8. Shulkin BL, Mitchell DS, Ungar DR et al. Neoplasm’s in a pediatric population: 2 (F18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucosa PET studies. Radiology 1995; 194: 495-500.

  9. Dahlbom M, Hoffman EJ, Hoh CK et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography: Part I. methods and performance characteristics. J Nucl Med 1992; 33: 1191-1199.

  10. Tarantola G, Zito F, Gerundini P. PET instrumentation and reconstruction algorithms in whole-body applications. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 756-769.

  11. Jadvar H, Alavi A, Mavi A, Shulkin BL. PET in pediatric diseases. Radiol Clin N Am 2005; 43: 135-152.

  12. Litvinov LI, Leoentva I et al. PET for diagnosis of mitochondrial cardiomyopathy in children. Clin Positron Imaging 2000; 3(4): 172.

  13. Truong MT, Erasmus JJ, Munden RF, Marom EM. Focal FDG Uptake in Mediastinal Brown Far Mimicking Malignancy: A Potential Pitfall Resolved on PET/CT. AJR 2004; 183: 1127 1132.

  14. Lucas JD, O’Doherty JJ, Cronin BF, Marsden PK et al. Prospective evaluation of soft tissue masses and sarcomas using fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. British Journal of Surgery 1999; 86: 550-556.

  15. Schwarzbach MHM, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A et al. Clinical Value of (18-F)Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Imaging in Soft Tissue Sarcomas. Annals of Surgery 2000; 231(3): 380-386.

  16. Roberts EG, Shulkin BL. Technical Issues in Performing PET Studies in Pediatric Patients. J Nucl Med Technol 2004; 32: 5-9.

  17. Havrilesky LJ, Wong TZ, Secord AA, Berchuck A, Clarke-Pearson DL, Jones EL. The role of PET scanning in the detection of recurrent cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 9 (7): 186-90.

  18. Bastiaannet E, Groen H, Jager PL et al. The value of FDG-PET in the detection, grading and response to therapy of soft tissue and bone sarcomas; a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treatment Reviews 2004; 30: 83-101.

  19. Altamirano LA, Estrada SGR, Ramírez AJL. Tomografía por emisión de positrones (PET). Fundamentos e indicaciones. Acta Médica Grupo Ángeles 2005; 3(3): 179-89.

  20. Bangerter M, Kotzerke J, GriesshammerM, Elsner K et al. Positron Emission Tomography with 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose in the Staging and Follow-up of Lymphoma in the Chest. Acta Oncologica 1999; 38(6): 799-804.

  21. Yat-Yin Y, Wing-Sze Ch et al. Application of Intravenous Contrast in PET-CT: Does it Really Introduce Significant Attenuation Correction Error? J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 283-291.

  22. Hafner J, Schmd MH, Kempf W, Burg G. Baseline Staging in cutaneous malignant melanoma. British Journal of Dermatology 2004; 150: 677-686.

  23. Sperti C, Pasquali C et al. F-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Differentiating Malignant From Benign Pancreatic Cysts: A Prospective Study. J Gastrointest Surg 2005; 9: 22-29.

  24. Wong RJ, Lin DT, Schóder H, Patel SG, Gonen M, Wolden S. Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of 18-F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography for Recurrent Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 4199-4208.

  25. Grab D, Flock F, Stóhr I, Nússle K, Rieber A. Classification of Asymptomatic Adnexal Masses by Ultrasound, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Positron Emission Tomography. Gynecologic Oncology 2000; 77: 454-459.

  26. Maisey NR, Hill ME, Webb A et al. Are 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging useful in the prediction of relapse in lymphoma residual masses? European Journal of Cancer 2000; 36: 200-206.

  27. Rostom, Powe J, Kandil A, Ezzat A, Bakheet S et al. Positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a clinicopathological correlation of results. The British Journal of Radiology 1999; 79: 1064-1068.

  28. Watanabe H, Inoue T, Schinozaki T, Yanagawa T. PET imaging of musculoskeletal tumours with fluorine-18 alfa-methyltyrosine: comparison with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxygluycose PET. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27: 1509-1517.

  29. Gotthardt M, Battmann A, Höffken H, Schurrat T, Pollum H. 18-F-FDG PET, somatostin receptor scintigraphy and CT in metastatic medullary thyroid carcinoma: a clinical study and an analysis of the literature. Nucl Med Commun 2004; 25: 439-443.

  30. Zhang H, Tian M, Oriuchi N, Higuchi T et al. 11 C-choline PET for the detection of bone and soft tissue tumours in comparison with FDG PET. Nuclear Medicine Communications 2003; 24: 273-279.

  31. Yanagawa T, Watanabe H, Inoue T, Ahmed AR, Tomiyoshi K. Carbon-11 Choline Positron Emission Tomography in Musculoskeletal Tumors: Comparison With Fluorine-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 2003; 27(2): 175-182.

  32. Hoegerle S, Nitzsche E, Altehoefer C. Pheochromocytomas: Detection with 18 F DOPA Whole-Body PET – Initial Results. Radiology 2002; 222: 507-512.

  33. Johnson GR, Zhuang H et al. Roles of Positron Emission Tomography With Fluorine-18 Deoxyglucose in the Detection of Local Recurrent and Distant Metastatic Sarcoma. Clin Nucl Med 2003; 28: 815-820.

  34. Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna Ch. Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Hodgkin Disease: Coregistered FDG PET and CT at Staging and Restaging- Do We Need Contrast-enhanced CT?Radiology 2004; 232: 823-829.

  35. Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H, Dahmen G, Mueller SP. Accuracy of Whole-Body Dual-Modality fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-glucose Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for Tumor staging in Solid Tumors: Comparison With CT and PET. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2004; 22: 4357-4368.

  36. Ruano AJ, Calderón EC. Oncología médico-quirúrgica pediátrica. 1ra edición. México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana, 2001: 14-21.

  37. Dodd LG, Scully SP, Cothran RL, Harrelson JM. Utility of fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of primary osteosarcoma. Diagn Cytopathol 2002; 27(6): 350-3.

  38. Davoudi MM, Yeh KA, Wei JP. Utility of fine-needle aspiration cytology and frozen section examination in the operative management of thyroid nodules. Am Surg 1997; 6 (12): 1084-9.

  39. Tsukushi S, Katagirl H, Nakashima H, Shido Y. Application and utility of computed tomography-guided needle biopsy with musculoskeletal lesions. J Orthop Sci 2004; 9(2): 122-5.

  40. Pacella SJ, Lowe L, Bradford C, Marcus BC. The utility of sentinel lymph node biopsy in head and neck melanoma in the pediatric population. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112(5): 1257-65.

  41. Ray CI, Ranchere VD, Thiesse P. Evaluation of core needle biopsy as a substitute to open biopsy in the diagnosis of soft tissue masses. Eur J Cancer 2003; 39(14): 2021-5.

  42. Kostakoglu L, Leonard JP, Kuji I, Coleman M, Vallabhajosula S. Comparison of fluorine 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography and Ga 67 Scintigraphy in Evaluation of Lymphoma. Cancer 2002; 94: 879-88.

  43. Haioun C, Itti E et al. 18-F Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography(FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: an early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood 2005; 106(4): 1376-1381.

  44. Franzius Ch, Sciuk J, Daldrup-Link HE, Jürgens H. FDG-PET for detection of osseous metastases from malignant primary bone tumours: comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27: 1305-1311.

  45. Filmont JE, Czernin J, Silverman DHS et al. Value of F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography for Predicting the clinical Outcome of Patients With Aggressive Lymphoma Prior to and After Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation. Chest 2003; 124: 608-613.

  46. Wong KKY, Lan LCL, Lin SCL, Tam PKH. The Use of Positron Emission Tomography in Detecting Hepatoblastoma Recurrence A cautionary Tale. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 2004; 39(12): 1779-1781.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com