The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine (대한핵의학회지)

The Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine (대한핵의학회)
권호 표지

Colonic Uptake Patterns of F-18-FDG PET in Asymptomatic Adults: Comparison with Colonoscopic Findings

무증상 성인의 F-18-FDG PET 대장 섭취양상 : 대장내시경 소견과의 비교

  • Pai, Moon-Sun (Department of Radiology, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Cho, Yoo-Kyung (Department of Gastroenterology, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Jung, Sung-Ae (Department of Gastroenterology, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Shim, Ki-Nam (Department of Gastroenterology, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, Hong-Soo (Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
  • 배문선 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 방사선과학교실) ;
  • 조유경 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 내과학교실) ;
  • 정성애 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 내과학교실) ;
  • 심기남 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 내과학교실) ;
  • 이홍수 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 가정의학과학교실)
  • Published : 2005.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Physiologic intestinal FDG uptake is frequently observed in asymptomatic individuals for cancer screening FDG PET Colonic FDG accumulation is a well-known confusing findings that interfere true cancer detection or cause false positive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern and intensity of colonic uptake in whole body FDG PET in asymptomatic healthy adults and to correlate them with colonoscopic findings. Materials and Methods: We reviewed retrospectively 64 subjects (age: 27-87, M:F=31:33) who underwent both FDG PET and colonoscopy for cancer screening. FDG uptake patterns were classified as focal, segmental and diffuse. Maximum SUV were measured. The PET results were compared with colonoscopic and histologic findings. Results: In 13 patients FDG bowel uptake was interpreted as focal, in 17 patients as segmental and in 34 patients as diffuse uptake. Six adenomas (17.6%, average diameter=5.0 mm) were found in diffuse pattern, 7 adenomas (41.1%, 5.6 mm) in segmental and 4 adenomas and 1 adenocarcinoma (38.5%, 16.4 mm) in focal uptake pattern. In patients with focal uptake, four were non-adenomatous pathologic lesions (30.8%, 2 intestinal tuberculosis, 2 mucosal ulcer). There is no difference of mean SUV between patients with adenoma and with negative colonoscopic results in each group of intestinal FDG pattern (Diffuse: $1.7{\pm}0.1\;vs.\;1.9{\pm}0.5$, Segmental: $4.8{\pm}3.6\;vs.\;4.2{\pm}1.2$, Focal: $6.5{\pm}4.7\;vs.\;3.5{\pm}1.3$). large adenomas (>1 cm) can be detected more in the focal uptake pattern (4 out of 5) rather than in segmental (1 out of 7) or diffuse uptake (none) and had higher SUV ($6.3{\pm}4.8$) than small adenomas ($3.5{\pm}3.0$) (statistically insignificant). Conclusion: focal FDG uptake is associated more often with large adenoma and other pathologic findings in colonoscopy. Segmental uptake cannot discriminate presence of adenoma from negative results, while diffuse pattern may have more chance to be normal.

목적 : 건강검진 등을 목적으로 시행된 무증상의 성인에서 대장 섭취는 매우 자주 관찰되나 대장선종 및 암종에서 FDG 섭취가 보고되어 생리적인 FDG 섭취와 구별이 쉽지 않았다. 이에 저자들은 무증상 성인을 대상으로 FDG-PET을 시행하여 그 섭취 패턴과 섭취 강도를 조사하고 대장내시경 소견과 비교하였다. 대상 및 방법 : FDG-PET과 대장내시경을 모두 시행한 무증상인 64명($27{\sim}87$세, 남:여=31:33) 을 대상으로 하였다. FDG 섭취 양상은 focal, segmental, diffuse세 그룹으로 나누고 모든 환자에 대해 최대 SUV값을 구하고 병소의 크기 및 조직학 소견과 비교하였다. 결과 : Diffuse 53.1%, Segmental 26.5%, Focal 20.3%의 섭취양상을 보였으며, Diffuse 양상을 보이면 대부분에서 정상이었고 선종이 소수 발견되었으나 크기가 작았다. Focal 양상의 환자에서는 선종 또는 기타 병리 소견 등의 양성 대장내시경 결과를 더 많이 보였고 다른 두 섭취 양상에서보다. 발견된 선종의 크기가 컸다. 대장 섭취정도를 SUV로 측정하였을 때 내시경 음성인 환자들은 선종 및 기타 병리소견이 있는 내시경 양성환자보다 SUV가 낮았으나 선종의 크기에 따른 SUV의 차이는 없었다. 결론: 무증상 환자에서 FDG-PET를 시행하였을 때 본 연구에서 제시된 대장 섭취 패턴과 섭취강도에 따른 내시경 결과와의 관계가 대장 선종 및 기타 병소를 진단하거나 내시경 등의 다음 검사로의 진행 결정에 일부 역할을 할 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. 한국중앙암등록본부. 보건복지부. 2002 Annual Report of the Korea Central Cancer Registry. 2003
  2. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Lieberman DA, Burt RW, Sonnenberg A. Colorectal cancer prevention 2000: screening recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:868-77
  3. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DH, Coleman RE, Phelps ME. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1S-93S
  4. Shin SJ, Choi JW, Lee SK, Choi, CH, Kim TI, Kim WH. A case of multiple colonic adenomas which were found incidentally in FDG-PET. Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2004;66:639-43
  5. Patrikeos AP, Mackay JR, Hicks RJ. Detection of synchronous adenocarcinomas and multiple dysplastic polyps with F-18 FDG positron emission tomography in a case of nonfamilial polyposis. Clin Nucl Med 2003;28:487-488 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003072-200306000-00008
  6. Okuno T, Fu KI, Sano Y, Yoshino T, Murakami K, Ochiai A, et al. Early colon cancers detected by FDG-pet: a report of two cases with immunohistochemical investigation. Hepatogastroenterology 2004;51:1323-5
  7. Kayani I, Groves AM, Syed R, Bomanji J. Combined F-18 FDG Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Diagnosis of Colonic Polyps: The Potential and Limitations of the Technique. Clin Nucl Med 2005;30:116-7 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003072-200502000-00013
  8. Kim S, Chung JK, Kim BT, Kim SJ, Jeong JM, Lee DS, Lee MC. Relationship between Gastrointestinal F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose Accumulation and Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Whole-Body PET. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2:273-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1095-0397(99)00030-8
  9. Cook GJ, Fogelman I, Maisey MN. Normal physiological and benign pathological variants of 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positronemission tomography scanning: potential for error in interpretation. Semin Nucl Med 1996;26:308-14 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-2998(96)80006-7
  10. Hannah A, Scott AM, Akhurst T, Berlangieri S, Bishop J, McKay WJ. Abnormal colonic accumulation of fluorine-18-FDG in pseudomembranous colitis. J Nucl Med 1996;37:1683-5
  11. Meyer M. Diffusely increased colonic F-18 FDG uptake in acute enterocolitis. Clin Nucl Med 1995;20:434-5 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003072-199505000-00012
  12. Drenth JP, Nagengast FM, Oyen WJ. Evaluation of (pre-)malignant colonic abnormalities: endoscopic validation of FDG-PET findings. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:1766-9 https://doi.org/10.1007/s002590100645
  13. Yasuda S, Fujii H, Nakahara T, Nishiumi N, Takahashi W, Ide M, et al. 18F-FDG PET detection of colonic adenomas. J Nucl Med 2001;42:989-92
  14. Tatlidil R, Jadvar H, Bading JR, Conti PS. Incidental colonic fluorodeoxyglucose uptake: correlation with colonoscopic and histopathologic findings. Radiology 2002;224:783-7 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2243011214
  15. Chen YK, Kao CH, Liao AC, Shen YY, Su CT. Colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic adults: the role of FDG PET scan. Anticancer Res 2003;23:4357-61
  16. Delbeke D, Martin WH. PET and PET-CT for evaluation of colorectal carcinoma. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34:209-23 https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2004.03.006
  17. Chun H, Kim CK, Krynckyi BR, Machac J. The usefulness of a repeat study for differentiating between bowel activity and local tumor recurrence on FDG PET scans. Clin Nucl Med 2003;28:672-673 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003072-200308000-00013
  18. Zhuang H, Yu JQ , Alavi A. Applications of fluorodeoxyglucose-PET imaging in the detection of infection and inflammation and other benign disorders. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43:121-34 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2004.07.005
  19. Yang CM, Hsu CH, Lee CM, Wang FC. Intense uptake of [F-18]-fluoro-2 deoxy-D-glucose in active pulmonary tuberculosis. Ann Nucl Med. 2003;17:407-10 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03006610
  20. O'Brien MJ, Gibbons D. The adenoma-carcinoma sequence in colorectal neoplasia. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1996;5:513-30
  21. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE. Colorectal lesions: evaluation with CT colography. Radiographics 1997;17:1157-67 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.17.5.9308108
  22. Ransohoff DF, Johnson CD. Clinical practice. Screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;346:40-4 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp010886