F-18 FDG Positron Emission Tomography에서 보이는 위(stomach) 섭취 양상의 임상적 의의: 위 내시경 소견과 비교 평가

Patterns of FDG Uptake in Stomach on F-18 FDG Positron Emission Tomography: Correlation with Endoscopic Findings

  • Chae, Min-Jeong (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Cheon, Gi-Jeong (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Lee, Sang-Woo (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Byun, Byung-Hyun (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Kim, Sung-Eun (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Kim, Yu-Chul (Departments of Internal Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Choi, Chang-Woon (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences) ;
  • Lim, Sang-Moo (Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Korea Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences)
  • 발행 : 2005.12.31

초록

목적: FDG PET에서 위(stomach)에 보이는 다양한 FDG 섭취 양상들이 임상적으로 어떠한 의미가 있는지 알아보고 유의한 병변의 특징적 양상을 밝혀 내어 좀 더 정확한 PET 판독을 유도하여 임상적 처치에 도움이 되고자 하였다. 대상 및 방법: 2003년 6월에서 2004년 8월까지, 15개월 동안 FDG PET과 위 내시경을 모두 시행한 위 절제술을 받지 않은 피검자들 중에서 두 검사간 간격이 1주일 이내인 총 38명을 대상으로 하여 후향적으로 연구하였다. PET 영상의 분석은 섭취 정도의 측면에서 시각적 섭취 정도와 max.SUV를 사용하였고, 섭취 모양의 측면에서 국소적, 미만성, 비대칭성의 섭취 양상을 인자로 분석하였다. 내시경 소견은 악성 병변, 염증성 병변, 비염증성 병변, 정상 소견으로 분류하였고, 염증성 병변은 다시 궤양, 위염(만성위염, 기타위염)으로 분류하였다. 통계적 분석은 t-test와 Mann Whitney test를 이용하였다. 결과: 악성 병변의 경우 시각적 섭취 정도에서 grade 4,5, max.SUV $7.95{\pm}4.38$로 높은 섭취 정도를 보였으며, 섭취 양상은 국소적 섭취 양상이었다. 이러한 기준에 따른 결과는 다른 병변들과 유의한 차이를 보였다. 염증성 병변, 비염증성 병변, 정상 소견에서는 시각적 섭취 정도가 grade$1{\sim}5$까지 다양하게 분포하였으며, 섭취 양상도 국소적, 미만성, 비대칭적인 다양한 양상이었다. 이러한 양성 염증성 병변, 비염증성 병변, 정상 소견 병변들 간에는 섭취 정도와 양상의 인자들 사이에 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 결론: 위의 악성 병변은 양성 병변에 비해 높은 FDG 섭취 정도를 보이고 섭취 양상에 있어서는 대개가 국소적 섭취 양상이었다. 그러나 위의 양성 병변과 정상에서는 다양한 정도의 섭취 정도와 섭취 양상을 보여 주었고, 각 병변들간에 또는 정상의 생리적 섭취와 구별할 수 있는 소견은 제시하기 어려웠다.

Purpose: we often find variable degrees of FDG uptake and patterns in stomach, which can make difficult to distinguish physiologic uptake from pathologic uptake on FDG PET. The purpose of this study was to find out the significant findings of stomach on FDG PET. Materials and Methods: Thirty-eight patients who underwent both FDG PET and endoscopy within one week from Jun. 2003, to Aug. 2004 were included in this study. We reviewed 38 patients (18 for medical check up, 15 for work up of other malignancies, and 5 for the evaluation of stomach lesion). Their mean age was 56 years old (range:$32{\sim}79$), men and women were 28 and 10, respectively. Two nuclear physicians evaluated five parameters on FDG PET findings of stomach with a consensus: 1) visual grades 2) maximum SUV (max.SUV) 3) focal 4) diffuse and S) asymmetric patterns. We correlated the lesions of FDG PET findings of stomach with those of endoscopy. We considered more than equivocal findings on FDG PET as positive. Results: The six of 38 patients were proven as malignant lesions by endoscopic biopsy and others were inflammatory lesions (ulcer in 3, chronic atrophic gastritis in 12, uncommon forms of gastritis in 5), non-inflammatory lesions (n=3), and normal stomach (n=9). By the visual analysis, malignant lesions had higher FDG uptake than the others. The max.SUV of malignant lesions was $7.95{\pm}4.83$ which was significantly higher than the other benign lesions ($2.9{\pm}0.69$ in ulcer, $3.08{\pm}1.2$ in chronic atrophic gastritis, $3.2{\pm}1.49$ in uncommon forms of gastritis (p=0.044)). In the appearance of stomach on FDG PET, malignant lesions were shown focal (5 of 6) and benign inflammatory lesions were shown diffuse (9 of 20) and asymmetric (14 of 20). Benign lesions and normal stomach were shown variable degrees of uptake and patterns. Some cases of benign inflammatory lesions such as ulcer and gastritis were shown focal and mimicked cancerous lesion (4 of 15). Conclusion: Gastric malignant lesions had higher FDG uptake and focal pattern. However, benign inflammatory lesions had moderate degrees of uptake and diffuse and asymmetric patterns rather than focal. It is difficult to differentiate between benign lesions including normal.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Kresnik E, Gallowitsch HJ, Mikosch P, Wrtz F, Alberer D, Hebenstreit A, et al. $^{18}F$-FDG positron emission tomography in the early diagnosis of enterocolitis: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1389-92 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-002-0901-7
  2. Israel O, Mor M, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Zachs Y, Keidar Z, et al. October 17, 2000 8:30-8:45. The New Technology of Combined Transmission and Emission F-18 FDG Tomography (FDG-TET) in the Diagnosis and Management of Cancer Patients. Clin Positron Imaging 2000;3:143
  3. Schiepers C, Hoh CK. Positron emission tomography as a diagnostic tool in oncology. Eur Radiol 1998;8:1481-94 https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300050579
  4. Abouzied MM, Crawford ES, Nabi HA. 18F-FDG Imaging: Pitfalls and Artifacts. J Nucl Med Technol 2005;33:145-55
  5. El-Haddad G, Alavi A, Mavi A, Bural G, Zhuang H. Normal variants in [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:1063-81 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2004.07.003
  6. Yun M, Choi HS, Yoo EH, Bong JK, Ryu YH, Lee JD. The role of gastric distention in differentiating recurrent tumor from physiologic uptake in the remnant stomach on 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2005;46:953-7
  7. Israel O, Yetremor N, Bar-Shalom R, Kagana O, Frenkel A, Keidar Z, et al. PET/CT detection of unexpected gastrointestinal foci of 18F-FDG uptake: incidence, localization patterns, and clinical significance. J Nucl Med 2005;46:758-62
  8. Ruiz-Hernandez G, Delgado-Bolton R, Rubio-Perez M, Jimenez-Vicioso A, Perez-Castejon M, Carreras-Delgado J. Recurrent signet-ring cell gastric carcinoma evidenced by FDG-PET Rev Esp Med Nucl 2005;24:326-30 https://doi.org/10.1157/13079285
  9. Tian J, Chen L, Wei B, Shao M, Ding Y, Yin D, et al. The value of vesicant 18 F-FDG PET in gastric malignancy. Nuc Med Commum 2004;25:825-31 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mnm.0000135042.54461.f6
  10. Chen J, Cheong JH, Yun MJ, Kim J, Lim JS, Hyung WJ, et al. Improvement in Preoperative Staging of Gastric Adenocarcinoma with Positron Emission Tomography. Cancer 2005;103:2383-90 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21074
  11. Buyyounouski MK, Klump WJ, Konski, A, Wu, H, Adler LP. FDG PET imaging of signet-ring cell adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Clin Nucl Med 2005;30:118-9 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003072-200502000-00014
  12. Valle JD. Peptic ulcer disease and related disorders. In: Kasper DL, Braunwald E, Fauci AS, Hauser SL, Longo DL, Jameson JL, editors. Harrison's principle of internal medicine. 16th ed. : Mcgrow Hill; 2005. p.1746-63
  13. Tan LT, Ong KL. Semi-quantitative measurement of normal organs with variable metabolic activity on FDG PET imaging. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2004;33:183-5
  14. Salaun PY, Grewal RK, Dodamane I, Yeung HW, Larson SM, Strauss HW. An analysis of the 18F-FDG uptake pattern in the stomach. J Nucl Med 2005;46:48-51
  15. Stahl A, Ott K, Weber WA, Becker K, Link T, Siewert JR, et al. FDG PET imaging of locally advanced gastric carcinoma : correlation with endoscopic & histopathological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:288-95 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-002-1029-5
  16. Mochiki E, Kuwano H, Katoh H, Asao T, Oriuchi N, Endo K. Evaluation of 18-F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography for gastric cancer. World J.Surg 2004;28:247-53 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-003-7191-5
  17. Koga H, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Hiraka K, Nakagawa M, Abe K, et al. An analysis of the physiological FDG uptake pattern in stomach, Annals of Nuc. Med 2003;17:733-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02984984
  18. Nunez RF, Yeung HW, Macapinlac H. Increased F-18 FDG uptake in the stomach. Clin Nuc Med 1999;2:281-2