Diagnostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Comparison to Bone Scintigraphy, CT and 18F-FDG PET for the Detection of Bone Metastasis

  • Liu, Ning-Bo (Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital) ;
  • Zhu, Lei (Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital) ;
  • Li, Ming-Huan (Department of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital) ;
  • Sun, Xiao-Rong (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Shandong Cancer Hospital) ;
  • Hu, Man (Department of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital) ;
  • Huo, Zong-Wei (PET/CT Center of Shandong Cancer Hospital) ;
  • Xu, Wen-Gui (Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital) ;
  • Yu, Jin-Ming (Department of Radiation Oncology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital)
  • Published : 2013.06.30


Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic value of $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT for detection of bone metastasis in comparison with the efficacies of $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT, CT, $^{18}F$-FDG PET and conventional planar bone scintigraphy in a series of cancer patients. Methods: Five hundred and thirty patients who underwent both $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT and bone scintigraphy within 1 month were retrospectively analyzed. The skeletal system was classified into 10 anatomic segments and interpreted blindly and separately. For each modality, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV were calculated and the results were statistically analyzed. Results: Bone metastases were confirmed in 117 patients with 459 positive segments. On patient-based analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV of $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT were significantly higher than bone scintigraphy, CT and $^{18}F$-FDG PET (P<0.05). On segment-based analysis, the sensitivity of CT, bone scintigraphy, $^{18}F$-FDG PET and $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT were 70.4%, 89.5%, 89.1% and 97.8%, respectively (P<0.05, compared with $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT). The overall specificity and accuracy of the four modalities were 89.1%, 91.8%, 90.3%, 98.2% and 90.3%, 90.9%, 89.8%, 98.0%, respectively (P<0.05, compared with $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT). The PPV and NPV were 89.8%, 87.6%, 85.6%, 97.2% and 85.6%, 93.2%, 92.8%, 98.6%, respectively. Three hundred and twelve lesions or segments were presented as lytic or sclerotic changes on CT images at the corresponding sites of increased $^{18}F$-FDG uptake. In lytic or mixed lesions, the sensitivity of $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT and $^{18}F$-FDG PET were better than bone scintigraphy, while in osteoblastic lesions bone scintigraphy had a similar performance with $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT but better than $^{18}F$-FDG PET alone. Conclusion: Our data allow the conclusion that $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT is superior to planar bone scintigraphy, CT or $^{18}F$-FDG PET in detecting bone metastasis. $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT may enhance our diagnosis of tumor bone metastasis and provide more information for cancer treatment.


Supported by : Nature Science Foundation of China


  1. Chang MC, Chen JH, Liang JA, et al (2013). Accuracy of whole-body FDG-PET and FDG-PET/CT in M staging of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur J Radiol, 82, 366-73.
  2. Choi YJ, Shin YD, Kang YH, et al (2012). The effects of preoperative (18)F-FDG PET/CT in breast cancer patients in comparison to the conventional imaging study. J Breast Cancer, 15, 441-8.
  3. Damle NA, Bal C, Bandopadhyaya GP, et al (2013). The role of (18)F-fluoride PET-CT in the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast, lung and prostate carcinoma: a comparison with FDG PET/CT and (99m)Tc-MDP bone scan. Jpn J Radiol, 31, 262-9.
  4. Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge TM, et al (2007). Fusion of metabolic function and morphology, sequential 18F fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol, 25, 3440-7.
  5. Evangelista L, Panunzio A, Polverosi R, et al (2012). Early bone marrow metastasis detection, the additional value of FDGPET/CT vs. CT imaging. Biomed Pharmacother, 66, 448-53.
  6. Fogelman I, Cook G, Israel O, et al (2005). Positron emission tomography and bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med, 35, 135-42.
  7. Fuglo HM, Jorgensen SM, Loft A, et al (2012). The diagnostic and prognostic value of $^{18}F$-FDG PET/CT in the initial assessment of high-grade bone and soft tissue sarcoma. A retrospective study of 89 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 39, 1416-24.
  8. Groheux D, Espié M, Giacchetti S, et al (2013). Performance of FDG PET/CT in the clinical management of breast cancer. Radiology, 266, 388-405.
  9. Iagaru A, Mittra E, Mosci C, et al (2013). Combined 18F-fluoride and 18F-FDG PET/CT scanning for evaluation of malignancy, results of an international multicenter trial. J Nucl Med, 54, 176-83.
  10. Kato H, Miyazaki T, Nakajima M, et al (2005). Comparison between whole-body positron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy in evaluating bony metastases of esophageal carcinomas. Anticancer Res, 25, 4439-44.
  11. Kim MR, Roh JL, Kim JS, et al (2008). 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy for detecting bone metastases in patients with malignancies of the upper aerodigestive tract. Oral Oncol, 44, 148-52.
  12. Masi L, Brandi ML (2001). Physiopathological basis of bone turnover. Q J Nucl Med, 45, 2-6.
  13. Lecouvet FE, El Mouedden J, Collette L, et al (2012). Can wholebody magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? Eur Urol, 62, 68-75.
  14. Liu N, Ma L, Zhou W, et al (2010). Bone metastasis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: the diagnostic role of F-18 FDG PET/CT. Euro J of Radio, 74, 231-5.
  15. Montini KM, Tulchinsky M (2012). False-positive bone metastases on PET/CT secondary to sarcoidosis in a patient with rectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med, 37, 307-10.
  16. Riegger C, Herrmann J, Nagarajah J, et al (2012). Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 39, 852-63.
  17. Rybak LD, Rosenthal DI (2001). Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases. Q J Nucl Med, 45, 53-64.
  18. Shie P, Cardarelli R, Brandon D, et al (2008). Meta-analysis, comparison of F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Clin Nucl Med, 33, 97-101.
  19. Shinji I, Katsuhiko K, Mitsuru I, et al (2007). Comparison of $^{18}F$-FDG PET and bone scintigraphy in detection of bone metastases of thyroid cancer. J Nucl Med, 48, 889-95.
  20. Wu Y, Li P, Zhang H, et al (2013). Diagnostic value of fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/ computed tomography for the detection of metastases in nonsmall-cell lung cancer patients. Int J Cancer, 132, E37-47.
  21. Yuji N, Christian C, Mitsuaki T, et al (2005). CT appearance of Bone Metastases Detected with FDG PET as part of the Same PET-CT Examination. Radiology, 237, 627-34.
  22. Zaman MU, Fatima N, Sajjad Z (2011). Metastasis on bone scan with low prostate specific antigen (${\leq}$20 ng/ml) and Gleason's score (<8) in newlydiagnosed Pakistani males with prostate cancer, should we follow Western guidelines? Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 12, 1529-32.

Cited by

  1. Standardized Uptake Values Highly Correlate with Tumor Size and Fuhrman Grade in Patients with Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma vol.15, pp.18, 2014,
  2. Retrograde Analysis of Clinical Characteristics of Bone Metastasis in 1,031 Cases of Preliminarily Diagnosed Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma vol.15, pp.8, 2014,
  3. Main controversies in breast cancer vol.5, pp.3, 2014,
  4. FDG Synthesis and Supply: a Journey from Existing Centralized to Future Decentralized Models vol.15, pp.23, 2015,
  5. Differences in the Prognostic Significance of the SUVmax between Patients with Resected Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma vol.15, pp.23, 2015,
  6. Hybrid Imaging in Oncology vol.16, pp.14, 2015,
  7. Mandibular metastasis of cholangiocarcinoma: A case report vol.45, pp.4, 2015,
  8. Evaluation of recurrence in gastric carcinoma: Comparison of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography vol.23, pp.35, 2017,
  9. A comparative study of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography and 99mTc-MDP whole-body bone scanning for imaging osteolytic bone metastases vol.15, pp.1, 2015,