Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print April 19, 2002, 10.1148/radiol.2233001850
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2233001850v1
223/3/780    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fenchel, S.
Right arrow Articles by Reske, S. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fenchel, S.
Right arrow Articles by Reske, S. N.
(Radiology 2002;223:780-788.)
© RSNA, 2002


Genitourinary Imaging

Asymptomatic Adnexal Masses: Correlation of FDG PET and Histopathologic Findings1

Sabine Fenchel, MD, Dieter Grab, MD, Karin Nuessle, MD, Joerg Kotzerke, MD, Andrea Rieber, MD, Rolf Kreienberg, MD, Hans-Juergen Brambs, MD and Sven N. Reske, MD

1 From the Departments of Nuclear Medicine (S.F., J.K., S.N.R.), Obstetrics and Gynecology (D.G., R.K.), and Radiology (K.N., A.R., H.J.B.), University of Ulm, Steinhövelstrasse 9, 89075 Ulm, Germany. From the 1999 RSNA scientific assembly. Received November 24, 2000; revision requested January 10, 2001; revision received September 11; accepted October 10. Address correspondence to S.F. (e-mail: sabine.fenchel@medizin.uni-ulm.de).

PURPOSE: To analyze asymptomatic adnexal masses at positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) in correlation with histopathologic findings and evaluate FDG PET for assessing malignancy in comparison with transvaginal B-mode and Doppler ultrasonography (US) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-nine patients underwent static FDG PET of the abdomen. US scans were evaluated according to sonomorphologic scoring systems. Resistance index of tumor blood vessels was calculated. Transverse and sagittal T1-weighted MR images obtained before and after intravenous administration of gadopentetate dimeglumine with a fat-saturation technique and T2-weighted MR images were acquired at 1.5 T. Adnexal mass malignancy was first assessed with each modality and then with a combination of the three techniques. Final diagnosis was made with histopathologic evaluation.

RESULTS: FDG PET depicted seven of 12 malignant and 66 of 87 benign asymptomatic adnexal tumors. False-negative PET results were obtained in five of seven stage pT1a cystadenocarcinomas and tumors of low malignant potential but not in advanced-stage ovarian carcinomas. Small moderately intense FDG accumulations in the lower pelvis were caused by benign adnexal tumors or gastrointestinal activity in 21 of 27 cases. The overall sensitivities and specificities were 58% (95% CI: 27.7, 84.8) and 76% (95% CI: 65.5, 84.4), respectively, for FDG PET; 92% (95% CI: 61.5, 99.8) and 60% (95% CI: 48.7, 70.1), respectively, for US; 83% (95% CI: 51.6, 97.7) and 84% (95% CI: 74.5, 90.9), respectively, for MR imaging; and 92% (95% CI: 61.5, 99.8) and 85% (95% CI: 75.8, 91.8), respectively, for the combination of three modalities.

CONCLUSION: Since the sensitivity of US is as high as that of PET, MR imaging, and the combination of three modalities, it remains the method of choice for diagnosis and assessment of asymptomatic adnexal masses.

© RSNA, 2002

Index terms: Ovary, MR, 852.121411, 852.121415, 852.12143 • Ovary, neoplasms, 852.30, 852.311, 852.313, 852.323, 852.324 • Ovary, PET, 852.12163 • Ovary, US, 852.12983, 852.12984, 852.12988, 852.12989 • Positron emission tomography (PET), comparative studies, 852.12163, 852.12166




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
T. Tsujikawa, Y. Yoshida, T. Mori, T. Kurokawa, Y. Fujibayashi, F. Kotsuji, and H. Okazawa
Uterine Tumors: Pathophysiologic Imaging with 16{alpha}-[18F]fluoro-17{beta}-estradiol and 18F Fluorodeoxyglucose PET--Initial Experience
Radiology, August 1, 2008; 248(2): 599 - 605.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNMHome page
J. H. O, I. R. Yoo, S. H. Kim, H. S. Sohn, and S. K. Chung
Clinical Significance of Small Pulmonary Nodules with Little or No 18F-FDG Uptake on PET/CT Images of Patients with Nonthoracic Malignancies
J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2007; 48(1): 15 - 21.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNMHome page
N. Pandit-Taskar
Oncologic Imaging in Gynecologic Malignancies
J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2005; 46(11): 1842 - 1850.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
N. Avril, S. Sassen, B. Schmalfeldt, J. Naehrig, S. Rutke, W. A. Weber, M. Werner, H. Graeff, M. Schwaiger, and W. Kuhn
Prediction of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy by Sequential F-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol., October 20, 2005; 23(30): 7445 - 7453.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Nucl. Med. Technol.Home page
M. M. Abouzied, E. S. Crawford, and H. A. Nabi
18F-FDG Imaging: Pitfalls and Artifacts
J. Nucl. Med. Technol., September 1, 2005; 33(3): 145 - 155.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
K-C Ho, K-K Ng, T-C Yen, and H-H Chou
An ovary in luteal phase mimicking common iliac lymph node metastasis from a primary cutaneous peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumour as revealed by 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography
Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2005; 78(928): 343 - 345.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
H. K. Pannu, R. E. Bristow, F. J. Montz, and E. K. Fishman
Multidetector CT of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis from Ovarian Cancer
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2003; 23(3): 687 - 701.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]