Display options
Cite
Tulin PE, Dolgushin MB, Odzharova AA, et al. Perfusion CT and PET with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Hybrid Imaging. 2017;1(1):13doi: 10.1186/s41824-017-0018-7.
Tulin, P. E., Dolgushin, M. B., Odzharova, A. A., Mikhaylov, A. I., Medvedeva, B. M., Shiryaev, S. V., & Dolgushin, B. I. (2017). Perfusion CT and PET with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. European journal of hybrid imaging, 1(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41824-017-0018-7
Tulin, P E, et al. "Perfusion CT and PET with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma." European journal of hybrid imaging vol. 1,1 (2017): 13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41824-017-0018-7
Tulin PE, Dolgushin MB, Odzharova AA, Mikhaylov AI, Medvedeva BM, Shiryaev SV, Dolgushin BI. Perfusion CT and PET with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Hybrid Imaging. 2017;1(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s41824-017-0018-7. Epub 2017 Dec 01. PMID: 29782602; PMCID: PMC5954776.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Eur J Hybrid Imaging. 2017;1(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s41824-017-0018-7. Epub 2017 Dec 01.

Perfusion CT and PET with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma.

European journal of hybrid imaging

P E Tulin, M B Dolgushin, A A Odzharova, A I Mikhaylov, B M Medvedeva, S V Shiryaev, B I Dolgushin

Affiliations

  1. 1Department of positron emission tomography of N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Kashirskoe shosse, 23, Moscow, 115478 Russia.
  2. ICERR FSBSI N.N. Blokhin RCRC, Moscow, Russia.
  3. Department of nuclear medicine and radionuclide therapy of N.N. Blokhin RCRC, Moscow, Russia.

PMID: 29782602 PMCID: PMC5954776 DOI: 10.1186/s41824-017-0018-7

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the study to evaluate possibilities of CT-perfusion and PET methods with 18F-FDG and 18F-fluorocholine in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. The study included the results of PET/CT with 18F-FDG, 18F-FCh and CT-perfusion of the liver in 18 patients with histologically confirmed diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Depending on the degree of tumor differentiation, all patients were divided into 3 groups - patients with highly differentiated (6 patients), moderately differentiated (4 patients), and low-differentiated HCC (8 patients).

RESULTS: Average values of maxSUV in the group of patients with highly differentiated HCC in PET/CT with 18F-FDG and 18F- fluorocholine in a solid component of tumor reached 3.51 and 18.24, respectively; in patients with moderately differentiated HCC - 3.91 and 12.32, respectively; in patients with low-differentiated HCC - 9.58 and 9.70, respectively. Average values of CT perfusion imaging in a solid component of the tumor in the group of patients with highly differentiated HCC were the following: BF - 55,33 ml/100 ml/min, BV - 13,71 ml/100 ml, ALP - 52,41 ml/100 ml/min, PVP - 10.81 ml/100 ml/min (

CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic capabilities of the complex of PET/CT techniques with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh and CT perfusion in a single-scan mode for hepatocellular carcinoma were evaluated for the first time. The obtained data allow to assume that the integrated use of PET with 18F-FDG and 18F-FCh and CT perfusion in a single scan improves the differential diagnostic possibilities of PET/CT diagnostics, which can find application in planning and prognosis of the disease. Due to the small number of patients further study of the problem is required.

Keywords: 18F–FCh; 18F–FDG; CT-perfusion; Hepatocellular carcinoma

Conflict of interest statement

Research, named as «Perfusion CT and PET with 18F–FDG and 18F–FCh in the complex diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma», performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by ethics

References

  1. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1968 Dec;104(4):874-9 - PubMed
  2. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1980 Nov;135(5):1037-43 - PubMed
  3. Biochem J. 1981 Apr 15;196(1):261-7 - PubMed
  4. Annu Rev Nutr. 1994;14:269-96 - PubMed
  5. Radiology. 1983 Jun;147(3):797-803 - PubMed
  6. Br J Radiol. 1991 May;64(761):409-12 - PubMed
  7. Lancet Oncol. 2012 Aug;13(8):790-801 - PubMed
  8. Br J Radiol. 1992 Jun;65(774):554-5 - PubMed
  9. J Clin Ultrasound. 1982 Oct;10 (8):373-8 - PubMed
  10. J Nucl Med. 2010 Nov;51(11):1699-706 - PubMed
  11. J Clin Invest. 1948 Jul;27(4):476-83 - PubMed
  12. Radiology. 1980 Dec;137(3):679-86 - PubMed
  13. Annu Rev Nutr. 1999;19:379-406 - PubMed
  14. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Jan;190(1):W28-34 - PubMed
  15. J Biol Chem. 1997 May 9;272(19):12854-61 - PubMed
  16. Abdom Imaging. 2009 Mar-Apr;34(2):193-209 - PubMed
  17. Science. 1965 Nov 19;150(3699):1030-1 - PubMed
  18. Arch Surg. 1998 May;133(5):510-5; discussion 515-6 - PubMed
  19. Cancer Res. 2004 Jun 1;64(11):3731-6 - PubMed
  20. Radiology. 1986 Jul;160(1):53-8 - PubMed
  21. J Appl Physiol. 1954 Jun;6(12):731-44 - PubMed
  22. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 May;43(5):852-9 - PubMed
  23. J Nucl Med. 2008 Aug;49(8):1245-8 - PubMed
  24. Eur J Radiol. 2010 Jan;73(1):148-52 - PubMed
  25. Ann Nucl Med. 2008 Jan;22(1):83-6 - PubMed
  26. J Cell Biochem. 2003 Oct 15;90(3):525-33 - PubMed
  27. Radiology. 1991 Feb;178(2):493-7 - PubMed
  28. Appl Radiat Isot. 2009 Jul-Aug;67(7-8):1195-8 - PubMed
  29. Radiology. 1985 Nov;157(2):305-11 - PubMed
  30. Radiology. 1993 Aug;188(2):405-11 - PubMed
  31. J Biol Chem. 1991 Mar 25;266(9):5497-507 - PubMed
  32. Semin Liver Dis. 1999;19(3):271-85 - PubMed
  33. Lancet. 1981 Nov 21;2(8256):1129-33 - PubMed

Publication Types