Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging fusion images of gynecological malignant tumors: comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography

PurposeWe compared the diagnostic accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) and PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion images for gynecological malignancies.Materials and methodsA total of 31 patients with gynecological malignancies were enrolled. FDG-PET images were fused to CT, T1- and T2-weighted images (T1WI, T2WI). PET-MRI fusion was performed semiautomatically. We performed three types of evaluation to demonstrate the usefulness of PET/MRI fusion images in comparison with that of inline PET/CT as follows: depiction of the uterus and the ovarian lesions on CT or MRI mapping images (first evaluation); additional information for lesion localization with PET and mapping images (second evaluation); and the image quality of fusion on interpretation (third evaluation).ResultsFor the first evaluation, the score for T2WI (4.68 ± 0.65) was significantly higher than that for CT (3.54 ± 1.02) or T1WI (3.71 ± 0.97) (P < 0.01). For the second evaluation, the scores for the localization of FDG accumulation showing that T2WI (2.74 ± 0.57) provided significantly more additional information for the identification of anatomical sites of FDG accumulation than did CT (2.06 ± 0.68) or T1WI (2.23 ± 0.61) (P < 0.01). For the third evaluation, the three-point rating scale for the patient group as a whole demonstrated that PET/T2WI (2.72 ± 0.54) localized the lesion significantly more convincingly than PET/CT (2.23 ± 0.50) or PET/T1WI (2.29 ± 0.53) (P < 0.01).ConclusionPET/T2WI fusion images are superior for the detection and localization of gynecological malignancies.

[1]  Y. Kanai,et al.  Simultaneous imaging of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography by means of MRI-compatible optic fiber-based PET: a validation study in ex vivo rat brain , 2009, Japanese Journal of Radiology.

[2]  M. Pui,et al.  MRI of gynecological neoplasm. , 2004, Clinical imaging.

[3]  P. Klemi,et al.  Staging of Uterine Endometrial Carcinoma with Ultra‐Low Field (0.02 T) MRI: A Comparative Study with CT , 1993, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[4]  A. Alavi,et al.  PET and PET–CT imaging of gynecological malignancies: present role and future promise , 2009, Expert review of anticancer therapy.

[5]  K. Nuessle,et al.  Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with MR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  R L Wahl,et al.  Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction. , 1993, Radiology.

[7]  D W. Townsend,et al.  Combined PET/CT Imaging in Oncology. Impact on Patient Management. , 2000, Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T.

[8]  J. Han,et al.  Preoperative Staging of Uterine Cervical Carcinoma: Comparison of CT and MRI in 99 Patients , 1993, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[9]  Yiyan Liu Benign ovarian and endometrial uptake on FDG PET-CT: patterns and pitfalls , 2009, Annals of nuclear medicine.

[10]  T. Yen,et al.  Standardized uptake value in para-aortic lymph nodes is a significant prognostic factor in patients with primary advanced squamous cervical cancer , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[11]  V. Nicolet,et al.  MR imaging of cervical carcinoma: a practical staging approach. , 2000, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[12]  Osman Ratib,et al.  OsiriX: An Open-Source Software for Navigating in Multidimensional DICOM Images , 2004, Journal of Digital Imaging.

[13]  K. Sugimura,et al.  Developing an MR imaging strategy for diagnosis of ovarian masses. , 2006, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[14]  K. Sugimura,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced CT , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[15]  Dae Chul Jung,et al.  Additional value of MR/PET fusion compared with PET/CT in the detection of lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. , 2009, European journal of cancer.

[16]  Caroline Reinhold,et al.  Early invasive cervical cancer: CT and MR imaging in preoperative evaluation - ACRIN/GOG comparative study of diagnostic performance and interobserver variability. , 2007, Radiology.

[17]  Tinsu Pan,et al.  Quantifying the effect of IV contrast media on integrated PET/CT: clinical evaluation. , 2006, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  Yong-Man Kim,et al.  Comparison of the validity of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the preoperative evaluation of patients with uterine corpus cancer. , 2008, Gynecologic oncology.

[19]  B. K. Swann,et al.  PET/MR images acquired with a compact MR-compatible PET detector in a 7-T magnet. , 2007, Radiology.

[20]  T. Yen,et al.  Restaging of recurrent cervical carcinoma with dual‐phase [18F]fluoro‐2‐deoxy‐D‐glucose positron emission tomography , 2004, Cancer.

[21]  C. Meltzer,et al.  PET/CT: form and function. , 2007, Radiology.