Journal of Gastric Cancer

The Korean Gastric Cancer Association (대한위암학회)
권호 표지

Effectiveness of Positron Emission Tomography in the Pre-operative Staging of Gastric Cancer

위암환자의 술 전 병기 결정에서 PET-CT의 유용성

  • Park, Shin-Young (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Bae, Jung-Min (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Kim, Se-Won (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Kim, Sang-Woon (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Song, Sun-Kyo (Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University)
  • 박신영 (영남대학교 의과대학 외과학교실) ;
  • 배정민 (영남대학교 의과대학 외과학교실) ;
  • 김세원 (영남대학교 의과대학 외과학교실) ;
  • 김상운 (영남대학교 의과대학 외과학교실) ;
  • 송선교 (영남대학교 의과대학 외과학교실)
  • Published : 2009.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine the usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT) in the pre-operative staging of gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: Between February 2006 and August 2008, PET-CT and CT were performed on 70 patients diagnosed with gastric cancer by gastrofiberscopic biopsy. The sensitivities, specificities, Positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of PET-CT and CT imaging for the detection of gastric cancer TNM staging were compared. Results: The detection rates for the primary tumor were as follows: PET-CT, 81.4% (57/70); and CT, 42.9% (30/70). For both early gastric cancer (EGC) and advanced gastric cancer (AGC), PET-CT was more accurate than CT in detecting the lesions. As the size of the tumor exceeded 3 cm, the detection rate increased. The sensitivities, specificities, PPV, and NPV of PET-CT for lymph node staging were 55.6%, 81%, 86.2%, and 45.9%, while the sensitivities, specificities, PPV, and NPV of CT were 40.0%, 85.7%, 85.7% and 40%, respectively. One case of multiple liver metastasis and two cases of dual primary cancer (rectal and pancreatic cancers) were detected by PET-CT. PET-CT also had a higher detection rate for all histologic types of primary tumors. PET-CT was more accurate than CT in detecting primary gastric cancer lesions. The detection of nodal metastasis by PET-CT was similar to CT; small-sized tumors or EGC detection rates were not high. However, PET-CT provided additional information to detect distant metastases and dual primary cancers and reduced unnecessary laparotomies to detect peritoneal seeding or carcinomatosis. Conclusion: It would be useful to make a pre-operative diagnosis of gastric cancer and determine treatment if PET-CT were added to other routine pre-operative studies.

목적: 위암환자의 수술 전 병기 결정에 있어서 PET의 유용성을 알아보기 위해 본 연구를 시행하였다. 대상 및 방법: 2006년 2월부터 2008년 8월까지 본원에서 위암으로 진단받고 수술 전 병기 결정을 위해 복부 컴퓨터 단층촬영(CT) 및 PET-CT를 모두 시험한 환자 70명을 대상으로 복부 CT 및 PET-CT 영상 자료에 의한 림프절 전이 판정과 수술 후 병리 조직검사에 의한 림프절 전이판정으로 민감도, 특이도, 양성예측도, 음성예측도 및 정확도를 조사하였고 위암의 형태, 조직학적 분류, 크기 등과 FDG섭취 정도와의 차이 등을 알아보았다. 결과: 조기 위암 23예의 경우 복부 CT에서 병변이 진단된 경우는 4명(17.4%), PET-CT에서는 12명(52.1%)이었으며, 진행 위암 47예의 경우 CT에서 26명(56.5%), PET-CT에서 45명(95.7%)으로 PET-CT에서 진단율이 높게 나타났다. 병변의 크기에 따른 분류에서도 복부 CT보다 PET-CT에서 진단율이 높은 것으로 나타났으며, 조기 위암의 경우 진행 위암에 비해 FDG 섭취 정도가 낮았지만 3 cm 이상의 조기 위암의 경우 3 cm 미만의 조기 위암에 비해 FDG가 섭취되는 경우가 더 많았다. CT에서 림프절 병기 결정의 민감도는 40.0%, 특이도는 85.7%, 양성예측도는 85.7%, 그리고 음성예측도는 40.0%였으며, PET-CT에서는 각각 55.6%, 81.0%, 86.2%, 45.9%였다. PET-CT를 통해서만 발견된 전이 병소는 1예(간전이)였으며, 중복암은 직장암 1예와 췌장암 1예가 있었다. 또한 세포조직형에 따른 분류에서도 분화영, 미분화형 모두 PET-CT에서 진단율이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 결론: CT에 비해 PET-CT에서 원발 병소의 진단, 림프절 전이 모두 진단율이 높은 것으로 나타났으며 PET-CT는 전이 병소와 중복암의 발견 등 다른 영상 진단법에 비하여 유리한 점이 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Lee DH, Ko YT, Yoon Y. Spiral CT of the gastric carcinoma. J Korean Radiol Soc 1997;37:123-128. https://doi.org/10.3348/jkrs.1997.37.1.123
  2. Strauss LG, Conti PS. The application of PET in clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 1991;32:623-648.
  3. Pauwels EK, McCready VR, Stoot JH, van Deurzen DF. The mechanism of accumulation of tumour-localising radiopharmaceuticals. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:277-305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002590050229
  4. Dahlbom M, Hoffman EJ, Hoh CK, Schiepers C, Rosenqvist G, Hawkins RA, Phelps ME. Whole-body positron emission tomography: Part I. Methods and performance characteristics. J Nucl Med 1992;33:1191-1199.
  5. Anderson H, Price P. What does positron emission tomography offer oncology? Eur J Cancer 2000;36:2028-2035. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00292-6
  6. 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
  7. Delbeke D, Vitola JV, Sandler MP, Arildsen RC, Powers TA, Wright JK Jr, Chapman WC, Pinson CW. Staging recurrent metastatic colorectal carcinoma with PET. J Nucl Med 1997; 38:1196-1201.
  8. Di Chiro G. Positron emission tomography using (18-F) fluorodeoxyglucose in brain tumor: a powerful diagnostic and prognostic tool. Invest Radiol 1987;22:360-371. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004424-198705000-00002
  9. Moon DH, Maddahi J, Silverman DH, Glaspy JA, Phelps ME, Hoh CK. Accuracy of whole-body fluorine-18-FDG PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic breast carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1998;39:431-435.
  10. Inoue T, Kim EE, Komaki R, Wong FC, Bassa P, Wong WH, Yang DJ, Endo K, Podoloff DA. Detecting recurrent or residual lung cancer with FDG-PET. J Nucl Med 1995;36:788-793.
  11. Couper GW, McAteer D, Wallis F, Norton M, Welch A, Nicolson M, Park KGM. Detection of response to chemotherapy using positrion emission tomography in patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1998;85:1403-1406. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2168.1998.00963.x
  12. Kole AC, Plukker JT, Nieweg OE, Vaalburg W. Positron emission tomography for staging of oesophageal and gastroesophageal malignancy. Br J Cancer 1998;78:521-527. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1998.526
  13. McAteer D, Wallis F, Couper G, Norton M, Welch A, Bruce D, Park K, Nicolson M, Gilbert FJ, Sharp P. Evaluation of 18F-FEG positron emission tomography in gastric and oesophageal carcinoma. Br J Radiol 1999;72:525-529. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.72.858.10560332
  14. Mukai K, Ishida Y, Okajima K, Isozaki H, Morimoto T, Nishiyama S. Usefulness of preoperative FDG PET for detection of gastric cancer. Gastric cancer 2006;9:192-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-006-0374-7
  15. Kim BI, Lee JI, Yang WI, Lee JS, Cheon GJ, Choi CW, Lim SM, Hong SW. Findings of F-18 FDG whole body PET in patients with stomach cancer. Korean J Nucl Med 2001;35: 301-312.
  16. Choi JY, Lee KH, Shim YM, Lee KS, Kim JJ, Kim SE, Kim BT. Improved detection of individual nodal involvement in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus by FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2000;41:808-815.
  17. Hyung WJ, Cheong JH, Kim J, Chen J, Choi SH, Noh SH. Analyses of prognostic factors and gastric cancer specific survival rate in early gastric cancer patients and its clinical implication. J Korean Surg Soc 2003;65:309-315.
  18. Yun M, Lim JS, Noh SH, Hyung WJ, Cheong JH, Bong JK, Cho A, Lee JD. Lymph node staging of gastric cancer using F-18-FDG PET: a comparison study with CT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1582-1588.
  19. Kinkel K, Lu Y, Both M, Warren RS, Thoemi RF. Detection of the hepatic metastases from the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MR imaging, PET): a meta-analysis. Radiology 2002;224:748-756. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2243011362
  20. Kim SK, Kang KW, Lee JS, Kim HK, Chang HJ, Choi JY, Lee JH, Ryu KW, Kim YW, Bae JM. Assessment of lymph node metastasis using 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:148-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-1887-8
  21. Townsend CM, Beauchamp RD, Evers BM, Mattox KL. Sabiston Textbook of Surgery. 18th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2008:1293.
  22. Turlakow A, Yeung HW, Salmon AS, Macapinlac HA, Larson SM. Peritoneal carcinomatosis: role of (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1407-1412.