 |
|
Positron Emission Tomography and UltrasonographyA Comparative Retrospective Study Assessing the Diagnostic Validity in Lymph Node Metastases of Malignant Melanoma
Charlotte Blessing, MD;
Ulrich Feine, MD;
Livia Geiger, MD;
Marina Carl, MD;
Gernot Rassner, MD;
Gerhard Fierlbeck, MD
Arch Dermatol. 1995;131(12):1394-1398.
Abstract
| |
Background and Design
A retrospective study involving 20 patients with melanoma with clinically suspicious lymph nodes was conducted to compare the diagnostic validity of fludeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography (PET) and real-time ultrasonography in lymph node metastases of malignant mela
Results
A total of 83 lymph nodes were assessed with ultrasonography and PET. Imaging results were confirmed by histologic studies or close follow-up ultrasonographic examinations. Positron emission tomography revealed a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 93%. Both investigative methods show comparative sensitivity and specificity.
Conclusions
Ultrasonography is much easier to perform, less time-consuming, and less expensive than PET and it is nonhazardous; therefore, it is ideal for follow-up procedures. Since in routine staging procedures, only sites of expected lymph node involvement are examined, there is a risk of metastases being missed in cases of atypical drainage patterns. Fludeoxyglucose F 18 PET can image proliferating tumors in multiple organ systems and lymph node sites in one session, making it suitable for screening in primary staging procedures and for monitoring response to therapy. Since it is based on metabolic changes, there is good differentiation between scar and tumor tissue. Major disadvantages are restricted access to investigation centers, high imaging costs, and limited anatomical location of metastatic lesions. We conclude that PET does not offer significant advantages in the diagnosis of lymph node metastases compared with ultrasonography.
(Arch Dermatol. 1995;131:1394-1398)
Author Affiliations
From the Departments of Dermatology (Drs Blessing, Carl, Rassner, and Fierlbeck) and Nuclear Medicine (Drs Feine and Geiger), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Role of PET in the Initial Staging of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma: Systematic Review
Krug et al.
Radiology 2008;249:836-844.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Positron Emission Tomography for Basal Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck
Fosko et al.
Arch Dermatol 2003;139:1141-1146.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Prospective Evaluation of a Follow-Up Schedule in Cutaneous Melanoma Patients: Recommendations for an Effective Follow-Up Strategy
Garbe et al.
JCO 2003;21:520-529.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Comparison of Positron Emission Tomography Scanning and Sentinel Node Biopsy in the Detection of Micrometastases of Primary Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma
Acland et al.
JCO 2001;19:2674-2678.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Tabulated Summary of the FDG PET Literature
Gambhir et al.
JNM 2001;42:1S-93.
FULL TEXT
Prospective Study of Fluorodeoxyglucose–Positron Emission Tomography Imaging of Lymph Node Basins in Melanoma Patients Undergoing Sentinel Node Biopsy
Wagner et al.
JCO 1999;17:1508-1508.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Early Detection of Melanoma Metastasis Using Fludeoxyglucose F 18 Positron Emission Tomography
Boni et al.
Arch Dermatol 1996;132:875-876.
ABSTRACT
Whole-Body Positron Emission Tomography: An Accurate Staging Modality for Metastatic Melanoma
Boni
Arch Dermatol 1996;132:833-834.
ABSTRACT
|
