This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wiering, B. Articles by Oyen, W. J. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wiering, B. Articles by Oyen, W. J. G.

Comparison of Multiphase CT, FDG-PET and Intra-Operative Ultrasound in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases Selected for Surgery

¹ Department of Surgical Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
² Department of Medical Technology Assessment, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
³ Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
⁴ Department of Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Correspondence: Address correspondence and reprint requests to: B. Wiering, Department of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, P.O. BOX 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; E-mail: b.wiering{at}chir.umcn.nl

Background: For patients with colorectal liver metastases, resection is the treatment of choice. Careful selection of these patients is crucial in order to reduce the chance of unexpected findings at laparotomy and abandoning further surgical intervention. Here, we evaluate the predictive value of CT and FDG-PET of the liver and extrahepatic findings compared to findings during laparotomy and 6 months follow-up.

Methods: 131 consecutive patients, selected for hepatic surgery for colorectal liver metastases by CT and FDG-PET, were evaluated prospectively. During surgery, the liver was assessed by intra-operative ultrasound, palpation and histology.

Results: In 127 patients (97%), CT was true-positive for liver metastases. In 3 patients, CT was false-positive and in 1 patient false-negative. In 126 patients (96%), FDG-PET was true-positive for liver metastases, in 2 patients FDG-PET was false-negative, in 3 patients true-negative (negative FDG-PET, false-positive CT). At laparotomy a total of 363 liver metastases was identified: 63 lesions <10 mm [10 (16%) detected by both CT and FDG-PET], 172 lesions of 10–20 mm [123 (72%) CT-positive, 129 (75%) by FDG-PET-positive], and 28 lesions >20 mm [124 (97%) CT-positive, 121 (95%) FDG-PET-positive].

CT and FDG-PET missed approximately 30% of the smaller liver lesions, resulting in a significant change in clinical management during surgery in only nine patients.

Conclusions: CT and FDG-PET have a similar diagnostic yield for the identification of liver metastases; both modalities being adequate on a patient-basis but inadequate to detect the smallest of liver lesions. However, the clinical relevance of the latter is limited.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Y-x He and Q-y Guo Clinical applications and advances of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) in the diagnosis of liver neoplasms Postgrad. Med. J., May 1, 2008; 84(991): 246 - 251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]