대한두경부종양학회지 (Korean Journal of Head & Neck Oncology)

  • 제26권1호
  • /
  • Pages.14-18
  • /
  • 2010
  • /
  • 1229-5183(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2586-2553(eISSN)
대한두경부종양학회 (The Korean Society for Head and Neck Oncology)
권호 표지

구강 및 구인두 편평상피암종의 림프절 전이에 대한 PET-CT 영상의 유용성

Utility of FDG PET-CT Scans on Nodal Staging of Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the Oral Cavity and Oropharynx

  • 주영훈 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 선동일 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 박준욱 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 이비인후과학교실) ;
  • 유이령 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 핵의학과학교실) ;
  • 김민식 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 이비인후과학교실)
  • Joo, Young-Hoon (Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Sun, Dong-Il (Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Park, Jun-Ook (Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Yoo, Ie-Ryung (Department of Nuclear Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Kim, Min-Sik (Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • 발행 : 2010.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objectives : We evaluated the use of FDG PET/CT for the identification of cervical nodal metastases of SCC of the oral cavity and oropharynx with histological correlation. Material and Methods : We reviewed 46 medical records, from January 2004 to July 2007, of patients who underwent FDG PET/CT and CT/MRI for SCC of the oral cavity and oropharynx before surgery. We recorded the lymph node metastases according to the neck level affected and the system used for the imaging-based nodal classification. Results : The FDG PET/CT had a sensitivity of 75.6% and a specificity of 96.7% ; it had a higher sensitivity than the CT/MRI for identification of cervical metastases on the side of the neck(26/28 vs. 20/28, p=0.031) and at each of the cervical levels(34/45 vs. 26/45, p=0.008). There was a significant difference in the $SUV_{max}$ between the benign and malignant cervical lymph nodes($3.31{\pm}3.23$ vs. $4.22{\pm}2.57$, p=0.028). The receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for differentiating the benign from the malignant cervical lymph nodes, showed that the area under the curve(AUC) of the FDG PET/CT was 0.775. The cut-off value for the $SUV_{max}$ was 2.23 based on the ROC curve. There was a significant correlation between the $SUV_{max}$ and the size of the cervical lymph nodes(Spearman r=0.353, p=0.048). Conclusion : FDG PET/CT images were more accurate than the CT/MRI images. In addition, the $SUV_{max}$ cut-off values were important for evaluating cervical the cervical nodes in the patients with SCC of the oral cavity and oropharynx.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Snow GB, Patel P, Leemans CR, Tiwari R. Management of cervical lymph nodes in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1992;249:187-194.
  2. Bailet JW, Abemayor E, Jabour BA, Hawkins RA, Ward PH. Positron emission tomography: A new precise imaging modality for detection of primary head and neck tumors and assessment of cervical adenopathy. Laryngoscope. 1992;102:281-288.
  3. Conti PS, Lilien DL, Hawley K, Keppler J, Grafton ST, Bading JR. PET and [F-18]-FDG in oncology: A clinical update. Nucl Med Biol. 1996;23:717-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0969-8051(96)00074-1
  4. Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H, Dahmen G, Mueller SP, Beyer T, et al. Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality fluorine-18-2-fluoro- 2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography(FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: Comparison with CT and PET. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4357-4368. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.08.120
  5. Kresnik E, Mikosch P, Gallowitsch HJ, Kogler D, Wiesser S, Heinisch M, et al. Evaluation of head and neck cancer with 18FFDG PET: A comparison with conventional methods. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:816-821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002590100554
  6. Stokkel MP, ten Broek FW, Hordijk GJ, Koole R, van Rijk PP. Preoperative evaluation of patients with primary head and neck cancer using dual-head 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Ann Surg. 2000;231:229-234. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200002000-00012
  7. Keyes Jr JW, Watson Jr NE, Williams 3rd DW, Greven KM, Mc- Guirt WF. FDG PET in head and neck cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1663-1669. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.169.6.9393187
  8. Ng SH, Yen TC, Liao CT, Chang JT, Chan SC, Ko SF, et al. 18F-FDG PET and CT/MRI in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: A prospective study of 124 patients with histologic correlation. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1134-1136.
  9. Ng SH, Yen TC, Chang JT, Chan SC, Ko SF, Wang HM, et al. Prospective study of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma with palpably negative neck. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4371-4376. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.05.7349
  10. Kunkel M, Forster GJ, Reichert TE, Jeong JH, Benz P, Bartenstein P, et al. Detection of recurrent oral squamous cell carcinoma by [18F]-2-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography: Implications for prognosis and patient management. Cancer. 2003;98:2257-2265. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11763
  11. Merritt RM, Williams MF, James TH, Porubsky ES. Detection of cervical metastasis. A meta-analysis comparing computed tomography with physical examination. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;123:149-152. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1997.01900020027004
  12. Di Martino E, Nowak B, Hassan HA, Hausmann R, Adam G, Buell U, et al. Diagnosis and staging of head and neck cancer: A comparison of modern imaging modalities(positron emission tomography, computed tomography, color-coded duplex sonography) with panendoscopic and histopathologic findings. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;126:1457-1461. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.126.12.1457
  13. Curtin HD, Ishwaran H, Mancuso AA, Dalley RW, Caudry DJ, McNeil BJ. Comparison of CT and MR imaging in staging of neck metastases. Radiology. 1998;207:123-130.
  14. Bar-Shalom R, Valdivia AY, Blaufox MD. PET imaging in oncology. Semin Nucl Med. 2000;30:150-185. https://doi.org/10.1053/snuc.2000.7439
  15. Adams S, Baum RP, Stuckensen T, Bitter K, Hor G. Prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET with conventional imaging modalities( CT, MRI, US) in lymph node staging of head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25:1255-1260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002590050293
  16. Mukherji SK, Bradford CR. Controversies: Is there a role for positron-emission tomographic CT in the initial staging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27:243-245.
  17. Dammann F, Horger M, Mueller-Berg M, Schlemmer H, Claussen CD, Hoffman J, et al. Rational diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region: Comparative evaluation of CT, MRI, and 18FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184: 1326-1331. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.184.4.01841326
  18. Paulino AC, Johnstone PA. FDG-PET in radiotherapy treatment planning: Pandora's box? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59: 4-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.10.045
  19. Fukui MB, Blodgett TM, Snyderman CH, Johnson JJ, Myers EN, Townsend DW, et al. Combined PET-CT in the head and neck: Part 2. Diagnostic uses and pitfalls of oncologic imaging. Radiographics. 2005;25:913-930. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.254045136
  20. Murakami R, Uozumi H, Hirai T, Nishimura R, Shiraishi S, Ota K, et al. Impact of FDG-PET/CT imaging on nodal staging for head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68(2):377-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.032