Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare multidetector CT (MDCT), MRI, and FDG PET/CT imaging for the detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifteen women with ovarian cancer and suspected PC underwent MDCT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT, shortly before surgery. Nine abdominopelvic regions were defined according to the peritoneal cancer index. We applied lesion size scores on MDCT and MR and measured FDG PET/CT standard uptake. We blindly read MDCT, MR, and PET/CT before joint review and comparison with histopathology. Receiver operating characteristics analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten women had PC (67%). Altogether, 135 abdominopelvic sites were compared. Multidetector CT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT had a sensitivity of 96%, 98%, and 95%, and specificity was 92%, 84%, and 96%, respectively. Corresponding receiver operating characteristics area was 0.94, 0.90, and 0.96, respectively, without any significant differences between them (P = 0.12). FDG PET/CT detected supradiaphragmatic disease in 3 women (20%) not seen by MDCT or MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI had the highest sensitivity and FDG PET/CT had the highest specificity, no significant differences were found between the 3 techniques. Thus, MDCT, as the fastest, most economical, and most widely available modality, is the examination of choice, if a stand-alone technique is required. If inconclusive, PET/CT or MRI may offer additional insights. Whole-body FDG PET/CT may be more accurate for supradiaphragmatic metastatic extension.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schmidt et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: