Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and MR with diffusion-weighted imaging for assessing peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastrointestinal malignancy

  • Oncology
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the accuracy of FDG-PET/CT and MR with diffusion-weighted imaging (MR-DWI) for diagnosing peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from gastrointestinal malignancies.

Methods

Thirty consecutive patients referred for staging of gastrointestinal malignancy underwent FDG-PET/CT and MR-DWI in this retrospective study. Extent of PC was characterised by dividing the peritoneal cavity into three sites in each patient: right and left supramesocolic areas and inframesocolic level (total 90 sites). Presence of PC was confirmed either by surgery (18/30) or by follow-up (12/30).

Results

PC was confirmed in 19 patients (19/30). At a total of 90 sites, 27 showed proven PC. On a patient-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy were respectively 84%, 73%, 84%, 73% and 80% for PET/CT and 84%, 82%, 89%, 75% and 83% for MR-DWI. On a site-based analysis, overall sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT (63%, 90%) and MR-DWI (74%, 97%) were not statistically different (P = 0.27). In the supramesocolic area, MR-DWI detected more sites involved than PET/CT (7/9 vs. 4/9). The sensitivities of PET and MR were lower for subcentimetre tumour implants (42%, 50%). Interobserver agreement was very good for PET/CT and good for MR-DWI.

Conclusions

FDG-PET/CT and MR-DWI showed similar high accuracy in diagnosing PC. Both techniques underestimated the real extent of PC because of decreased sensitivity for subcentimetre lesions.

Key Points

FDG-PET/CT and MR-DWI showed similar high accuracy for diagnosing peritoneal carcinomatosis.

In the supramesocolic area, MR-DWI could be more sensitive than PET/CT.

Both techniques showed lower sensitivity for subcentimetre lesions.

Interobserver agreement was very good for PET/CT and good for MR-DWI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Verwaal VJ, van Ruth S, de Bree E, van Sloothen GW, van Tinteren H, Boot H et al (2003) Randomized trial of cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy and palliative surgery in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 21:3737–3743

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Glehen O, Kwiatkowski F, Sugarbaker PH, Elias D, Levine EA, De Simone M et al (2004) Cytoreductive surgery combined with perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer: a multi-institutional study. J Clin Oncol 22:3284–3292

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. de Bree E, Koops W, Kroger R, van Ruth S, Witkamp AJ, Zoetmulder FA (2004) Peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal or appendiceal origin: correlation of preoperative CT with intraoperative findings and evaluation of interobserver agreement. J Surg Oncol 86:64–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Coakley FV, Choi PH, Gougoutas CA, Pothuri B, Venkatraman E, Chi D et al (2002) Peritoneal metastases: detection with spiral CT in patients with ovarian cancer. Radiology 223:495–499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Koh DM, Collins DJ (2007) Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1622–1635

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fujii S, Matsusue E, Kanasaki Y, Kanamori Y, Nakanishi J, Sugihara S et al (2008) Detection of peritoneal dissemination in gynecological malignancy: evaluation by diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Eur Radiol 18:18–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Low RN, Sebrechts CP, Barone RM, Muller W (2009) Diffusion-weighted MRI of peritoneal tumors: comparison with conventional MRI and surgical and histopathologic findings – a feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:461–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kyriazi S, Collins DJ, Morgan VA, Giles SL, deSouza NM (2010) Diffusion-weighted imaging of peritoneal disease for noninvasive staging of advanced ovarian cancer. Radiographics 30:1269–1285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH et al (2008) Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 49:480–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Berthelot C, Morel O, Girault S, Verriele V, Poirier AL, Moroch J et al (2011) Use of FDG-PET/CT for peritoneal carcinomatosis before hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Nucl Med Comm 32:23–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dromain C, Leboulleux S, Auperin A, Goere D, Malka D, Lumbroso J et al (2008) Staging of peritoneal carcinomatosis: enhanced CT vs PET/CT. Abdom Imaging 33:87–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pfannenberg C, Konigsrainer I, Aschoff P, Oksuez MO, Zieker D, Beckert S et al (2009) (18)F-FDG-PET/CT to select patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1295–1303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jacquet P, Sugarbaker PH (1996) Clinical research methodologies in diagnosis and staging of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer Treat Res 82:359–374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kwee TC, Takahara T, Ochiai R, Nievelstein RA, Luijten PR (2008) Diffusion-weighted whole-body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): features and potential applications in oncology. Eur Radiol 18:1937–1952

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tohma T, Okazumi S, Makino H, Cho A, Mochiduki R, Shuto K et al (2005) Relationship between glucose transporter, hexokinase and FDG-PET in esophageal cancer. Hepatogastroenterology 52:486–490

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sanchez Salmon A, Barandela Salgado J, Ruibal Morell A (2006) PET in abdominal pathology: advantages and limitations. Abdom Imaging 31:174–181

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bozkurt M, Doganay S, Kantarci M, Yalcin A, Eren S, Atamanalp SS et al (2011) Comparison of peritoneal tumor imaging using conventional MR imaging and diffusion-weighted MR imaging with different b values. Eur J Radiol 80:224–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kandpal H, Sharma R, Madhusudhan KS, Kapoor KS (2009) Respiratory-triggered versus breath-hold diffusion-weighted MRI of liver lesions: comparison of image quality and apparent diffusion coefficient values. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:915–922

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bettinardi V, Picchio M, Di Muzio N, Gianolli L, Gilardi MC, Messa C (2010) Detection and compensation of organ/lesion motion using 4D-PET/CT respiratory gated acquisition techniques. Radiother Oncol 96:311–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Satoh Y, Ichikawa T, Motosugi U, Kimura K, Sou H, Sano K et al (2011) Diagnosis of peritoneal dissemination: comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT, diffusion-weighted MRI, and contrast-enhanced MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:447–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to Dr Bernard Uzzan, who carefully reviewed the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Soussan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Soussan, M., Des Guetz, G., Barrau, V. et al. Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and MR with diffusion-weighted imaging for assessing peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastrointestinal malignancy. Eur Radiol 22, 1479–1487 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2397-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2397-2

Keywords

Navigation