Reliability of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy and Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography in Differentiating Metastatic Brain Tumor Recurrence from Radiation Necrosis

被引:0
|
作者
Travers, Sarah [1 ]
Joshi, Kirtan [1 ]
Miller, Douglas C. [5 ]
Singh, Amolak [2 ]
Nada, Ayman [3 ]
Biedermann, Gregory [4 ]
Cousins, Joseph P. [4 ]
Litofsky, N. Scott [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Missouri, Div Neurol Surg, Sch Med, Columbia, MO 65212 USA
[2] Univ Missouri, Div Nucl Med, Sch Med, Columbia, MO USA
[3] Univ Missouri, Div Neuroradiol, Sch Med, Columbia, MO USA
[4] Univ Missouri, Div Radiat Oncol, Sch Med, Columbia, MO USA
[5] Univ Missouri, Dept Pathol & Anat Sci, Sch Med, Columbia, MO USA
关键词
Brain PET CT; Brain tumor recurrence; MR spectroscopy; Radiation necrosis; Stereotactic radiosurgery; GAMMA-KNIFE; STEREOTACTIC RADIOSURGERY; MR-SPECTROSCOPY; FDG-PET; RADIONECROSIS; PROGRESSION; DIAGNOSIS; PATTERN; GLIOMAS; LESIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.WNEU.2021.05.064
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: Clinical and/or neuroimaging changes after whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for metastatic brain tumor(s) present the clinical dilemma of differentiating tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis. Several imaging modalities attempt to answer this clinical question, including magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography (CT). We evaluated our experience regarding the ability of MRS and PET CT to differentiate tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis in patients who have received WBRT or SRS. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of 242 patients with previous WBRT or SRS to identify those who had MRS and/or PET CT to differentiate tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis. Patients were sorted into true positive, false-positive, false-negative, and true-negative groups on the basis of imaging interpretation and clinical course combined with surgical pathology results or reaction to nonsurgical treatments including SRS, dexamethasone, or observation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were then calculated. RESULTS: Of 25 patients presenting such diagnostic questions, 19 were evaluated with MRS and 13 with PET CT. MRS sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 50%, and accuracy was 81.8%, whereas PET CT sensitivity was 36.4%, specificity was 66.7%, and accuracy was 42.9%. CONCLUSIONS: MRS has better accuracy than PET CT and a high negative predictive value, therefore making it more useful in distinguishing recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis. We encourage correlation with symptoms at imaging to aid in clinical decision making.
引用
收藏
页码:E1059 / E1068
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Functional Imaging of Colorectal Cancer: Positron Emission Tomography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Computed Tomography
    Kapse, Nikhil
    Goh, Vicky
    CLINICAL COLORECTAL CANCER, 2009, 8 (02) : 77 - 87
  • [22] Diagnostic imaging for pancreatic cancer - Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography
    Saisho, H
    Yamaguchi, T
    PANCREAS, 2004, 28 (03) : 273 - 278
  • [23] Radiological diagnosis in cholangiocarcinoma: Application of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography
    Ringe, Kristina L.
    Wacker, Frank
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 29 (02) : 253 - 265
  • [24] Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and FDG positron emission tomography in the management of vulvar malignancies
    Lin, Gigin
    Chen, Chao-Yu
    Liu, Feng-Yuan
    Yang, Lan-Yan
    Huang, Huei-Jean
    Huang, Yi-Ting
    Jung, Shih-Ming
    Chou, Hung-Hsueh
    Lai, Chyong-Huey
    Ng, Koon-Kwan
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2015, 25 (05) : 1267 - 1278
  • [25] Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and FDG positron emission tomography in the management of vulvar malignancies
    Gigin Lin
    Chao-Yu Chen
    Feng-Yuan Liu
    Lan-Yan Yang
    Huei-Jean Huang
    Yi-Ting Huang
    Shih-Ming Jung
    Hung-Hsueh Chou
    Chyong-Huey Lai
    Koon-Kwan Ng
    European Radiology, 2015, 25 : 1267 - 1278
  • [26] Positron emission tomography with computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging for primary staging of prostate cancer
    Hasa, Ergela
    Langbein, Thomas
    Eiber, Matthias
    Knorr, Karina
    RADIOLOGE, 2021, 61 (09): : 818 - 824
  • [27] [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography: Computed tomography in recurrent and metastatic cholangiocarcinoma
    Jadvar, Hossein
    Henderson, Robert W.
    Conti, Peter S.
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2007, 31 (02) : 223 - 228
  • [28] Comparison of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and positron emission tomography in detection of tumor recurrence in posttreatment of glioma: A diagnostic meta-analysis
    Wang, Xiaoyue
    Hu, Xudong
    Xie, Peng
    Li, Wanhu
    Li, Xiaoling
    Ma, Li
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 11 (02) : 97 - 105
  • [29] Combined use of F-18 fluorocholine positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance spectroscopy for brain tumor evaluation
    Kwee, SA
    Coel, MN
    Lim, J
    Ko, JP
    JOURNAL OF NEUROIMAGING, 2004, 14 (03) : 285 - 289
  • [30] Quality assurance of positron emission tomography/computed tomography for radiation therapy
    Xing, Lei
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 71 (01): : S38 - S42