Display options
Cite
Dyrberg E, Hendel HW, Al-Farra G, et al. A prospective study comparing whole-body skeletal X-ray survey with 18F-FDG-PET/CT, 18F-NaF-PET/CT and whole-body MRI in the detection of bone lesions in multiple myeloma patients. Acta Radiol Open. 2017;6(10):2058460117738809doi: 10.1177/2058460117738809.
Dyrberg, E., Hendel, H. W., Al-Farra, G., Balding, L., Løgager, V. B., Madsen, C., & Thomsen, H. S. (2017). A prospective study comparing whole-body skeletal X-ray survey with 18F-FDG-PET/CT, 18F-NaF-PET/CT and whole-body MRI in the detection of bone lesions in multiple myeloma patients. Acta radiologica open, 6(10), 2058460117738809. https://doi.org/10.1177/2058460117738809
Dyrberg, Eva, et al. "A prospective study comparing whole-body skeletal X-ray survey with 18F-FDG-PET/CT, 18F-NaF-PET/CT and whole-body MRI in the detection of bone lesions in multiple myeloma patients." Acta radiologica open vol. 6,10 (2017): 2058460117738809. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2058460117738809
Dyrberg E, Hendel HW, Al-Farra G, Balding L, Løgager VB, Madsen C, Thomsen HS. A prospective study comparing whole-body skeletal X-ray survey with 18F-FDG-PET/CT, 18F-NaF-PET/CT and whole-body MRI in the detection of bone lesions in multiple myeloma patients. Acta Radiol Open. 2017 Oct 27;6(10):2058460117738809. doi: 10.1177/2058460117738809. eCollection 2017 Oct. PMID: 29123920; PMCID: PMC5661685.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Acta Radiol Open. 2017 Oct 27;6(10):2058460117738809. doi: 10.1177/2058460117738809. eCollection 2017 Oct.

A prospective study comparing whole-body skeletal X-ray survey with 18F-FDG-PET/CT, 18F-NaF-PET/CT and whole-body MRI in the detection of bone lesions in multiple myeloma patients.

Acta radiologica open

Eva Dyrberg, Helle W Hendel, Gina Al-Farra, Lone Balding, Vibeke B Løgager, Claus Madsen, Henrik S Thomsen

Affiliations

  1. Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Herlev, Denmark.

PMID: 29123920 PMCID: PMC5661685 DOI: 10.1177/2058460117738809

Abstract

BACKGROUND: For decades, the most widely used imaging technique for myeloma bone lesions has been a whole-body skeletal X-ray survey (WBXR), but newer promising imaging techniques are evolving.

PURPOSE: To compare WBXR with the advanced imaging techniques 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT), 18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) PET/CT and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) in the detection of myeloma bone lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fourteen patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were prospectively enrolled. In addition to WBXR, all patients underwent FDG-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, and WB-MRI. Experienced specialists performed blinded readings based on predefined anatomical regions and diagnostic criteria.

RESULTS: In a region-based analysis, a two-sided ANOVA test showed that the extent of detected skeletal disease depends on the scanning technique (

CONCLUSION: WB-MRI detects on average significantly more body regions indicative of myeloma bone disease compared to WBXR, FDG-PET/CT, and NaF-PET/CT. The lack of significance in the patient-based analysis is most likely due to the small number of study participants.

Keywords: 18F-FDG; 18F-fluoride; MRI; Multiple myeloma; PET/CT; bone imaging; radiographic survey

References

  1. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Apr;190(4):1097-104 - PubMed
  2. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006 May;33(5):525-31 - PubMed
  3. Eur J Radiol. 2014 Dec;83(12 ):2203-2223 - PubMed
  4. Clin Nucl Med. 2009 Oct;34(10 ):689-90 - PubMed
  5. Clin Nucl Med. 2007 Feb;32(2):114-6 - PubMed
  6. Int J Lab Hematol. 2017 Feb;39(1):3-13 - PubMed
  7. Clin Radiol. 2015 Jun;70(6):614-21 - PubMed
  8. Ann Hematol. 2015 Sep;94(9):1567-75 - PubMed
  9. Br J Haematol. 2013 Jul;162(1):50-61 - PubMed
  10. World J Surg Oncol. 2007 Jun 20;5:68 - PubMed
  11. Rheumatol Int. 2014 Nov;34(11):1545-54 - PubMed
  12. Radiology. 2011 Dec;261(3):700-18 - PubMed
  13. Br J Radiol. 2015 Aug;88(1052):20150145 - PubMed
  14. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Nov;15(12):e538-48 - PubMed
  15. Radiographics. 2015 Mar-Apr;35(2):438-54 - PubMed
  16. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2013 Jun;94(6):629-36 - PubMed
  17. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014 Jul;41(7):1343-53 - PubMed

Publication Types