Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, University at Duisburg-Essen, Germany.
Br J Radiol. 2011 Feb;84(998):126-35. doi: 10.1259/bjr/93330765. Epub 2010 Oct 19.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of fused fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance mammography (FDG-PET/MRM) in breast cancer patients and to compare FDG-PET/MRM with MRM.
27 breast cancer patients (mean age 58.9±9.9 years) underwent MRM and prone FDG-PET. Images were fused software-based to FDG-PET/MRM images. Histopathology served as the reference standard to define the following parameters for both MRM and FDG-PET/MRM: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy for the detection of breast cancer lesions. Furthermore, the number of patients with correctly determined lesion focality was assessed. Differences between both modalities were assessed by McNemaŕs test (p<0.05). The number of patients in whom FDG-PET/MRM would have changed the surgical approach was determined.
58 breast lesions were evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy were 93%, 60%, 87%, 75% and 85% for MRM, respectively. For FDG-PET/MRM they were 88%, 73%, 90%, 69% and 92%, respectively. FDG-PET/MRM was as accurate for lesion detection (p = 1) and determination of the lesions' focality (p = 0.7722) as MRM. In only 1 patient FDG-PET/MRM would have changed the surgical treatment.
FDG-PET/MRM is as accurate as MRM for the evaluation of local breast cancer. FDG-PET/MRM defines the tumours' focality as accurately as MRM and may have an impact on the surgical treatment in only a small portion of patients. Based on these results, FDG-PET/MRM cannot be recommended as an adjunct or alternative to MRM.
本研究旨在评估氟代脱氧葡萄糖正电子发射断层扫描/磁共振乳腺摄影(FDG-PET/MRM)融合技术在乳腺癌患者中的诊断准确性,并比较 FDG-PET/MRM 与 MRM 的性能。
27 例乳腺癌患者(平均年龄 58.9±9.9 岁)接受了 MRM 和俯卧位 FDG-PET 检查。图像通过软件融合为 FDG-PET/MRM 图像。组织病理学作为参考标准,用于定义 MRM 和 FDG-PET/MRM 的以下参数:乳腺癌病变的检测灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和准确性。此外,评估了正确确定病变局灶性的患者数量。通过 McNemar 检验评估两种模态之间的差异(p<0.05)。确定 FDG-PET/MRM 会改变手术方式的患者数量。
共评估了 58 个乳腺病变。MRM 的灵敏度、特异性、PPV、NPV 和准确性分别为 93%、60%、87%、75%和 85%,而 FDG-PET/MRM 的分别为 88%、73%、90%、69%和 92%。FDG-PET/MRM 在病变检测(p=1)和病变局灶性的确定(p=0.7722)方面与 MRM 一样准确。只有 1 例患者的 FDG-PET/MRM 会改变手术治疗方式。
FDG-PET/MRM 与 MRM 一样准确,可用于评估局部乳腺癌。FDG-PET/MRM 与 MRM 一样准确地定义肿瘤的局灶性,仅在一小部分患者中可能对手术治疗产生影响。基于这些结果,不能推荐 FDG-PET/MRM 作为 MRM 的辅助或替代方法。