Incidental 18F-FDG uptake in the colon: value of contrast-enhanced CT correlation with colonoscopic findings
- 14 Downloads
To evaluate the impact of morphological information derived from contrast-enhanced CT in the characterization of incidental focal colonic uptake in 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations.
A total of 125 patients (female: n = 53, male: n = 72) that underwent colonoscopy secondary to contrast-enhanced, full-dose PET/CT without special bowel preparation were included in this retrospective study. PET/CT examinations were assessed for focal colonic tracer uptake in comparison with the background. Focal tracer uptake was correlated with morphological changes of the colonic wall in the contrast-enhanced CT images. Colonoscopy reports were evaluated for benign, inflammatory, polypoid, precancerous, and cancerous lesions verified by histopathology, serving as a reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy for detection of therapeutic relevant findings were calculated for (a) sole focal tracer uptake and (b) focal tracer uptake with correlating CT findings in contrast-enhanced CT.
In 38.4% (48/125) of the patients, a focal 18F-FDG uptake was observed within 67 lesions. Malignant lesions were endoscopically and histopathologically diagnosed in eleven patients, and nine of these were detected by focal 18F-FDG uptake. A total of 34 lesions with impact on short- or long-term patient management (either being pre- or malignant) were detected. Sensitivity, Specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy for sole 18F-FDG uptake for this combined group were 54%, 69%, 29%, 85%, and 65%. Corresponding results for focal 18F-FDG uptake with correlating CT findings were 38%, 90%, 50%, 86%, and 80%. This resulted in a statistically significant difference for diagnostic accuracy (p = 0.0001)
By analyzing additional morphological changes in contrast-enhanced CT imaging, the specificity of focal colonic 18F-FDG uptake for precancerous and cancerous lesions can be increased but leads to a considerate loss of sensitivity. Therefore, every focal colonic uptake should be followed up by colonoscopy.
Keywords18F-FDG Colon Contrast-enhanced CT
This publication contains parts of the MD thesis of Firas Kour and is therefore in partial fulfillment of the requirements for an MD thesis at the Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
Informed consent was waived by the IRB for this retrospective analysis.
- 3.Sobic-Saranovic D, Grozdic I, Videnovic-Ivanov J, Vucinic-Mihailovic V, Artiko V, Saranovic D, et al. The utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT for diagnosis and adjustment of therapy in patients with active chronic sarcoidosis. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1543–9. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.104380.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Peng J, He Y, Xu J, Sheng J, Cai S, Zhang Z. Detection of incidental colorectal tumours with 18F-labelled 2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans: results of a prospective study. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13:e374–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02727.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Treglia G, Calcagni ML, Rufini V, Leccisotti L, Meduri GM, Spitilli MG, et al. Clinical significance of incidental focal colorectal (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake: our experience and a review of the literature. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:174–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02588.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Oh JR, Min JJ, Song HC, Chong A, Kim GE, Choi C, et al. A stepwise approach using metabolic volume and SUVmax to differentiate malignancy and dysplasia from benign colonic uptakes on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:e134–40. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e318239245d.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Luboldt W, Volker T, Wiedemann B, Zophel K, Wehrmann U, Koch A, et al. Detection of relevant colonic neoplasms with PET/CT: promising accuracy with minimal CT dose and a standardised PET cut-off. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:2274–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1772-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.Stoop EM, de Haan MC, de Wijkerslooth TR, Bossuyt PM, van Ballegooijen M, Nio CY, et al. Participation and yield of colonoscopy versus non-cathartic CT colonography in population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70283-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 28.Klein JL, Okcu M, Preisegger KH, Hammer HF. Distribution, size and shape of colorectal adenomas as determined by a colonoscopist with a high lesion detection rate: Influence of age, sex and colonoscopy indication. United European Gastroenterol J. 2016;4:438–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050640615610266.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar