Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Usefulness of FDG-PET scan in the assessment of suspected metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of positron emission tomography with 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose compared with computed tomography plus other conventional diagnostic studies in patients suspected of having metastatic or recurrent colorectal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: The records of 105 patients who underwent 101 computed tomography and 109 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography scans for suspected metastatic or recurrent colorectal adenocarcinoma were reviewed. Clinical correlation was confirmed at time of operation, histopathologically, or by clinical course. RESULTS: The overall sensitivity and specificity of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in detection of clinically relevant tumor were higher (87 and 68 percent) than for computed tomography plus other conventional diagnostic studies (66 and 59 percent). The sensitivity of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in detecting mucinous cancer was lower (58 percent; n=16) than for nonmucinous cancer (92 percent; n=93). The sensitivity of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in detecting locoregional recurrence (n=70) was higher than for computed tomography plus colonoscopy (90vs. 71 percent, respectively). The sensitivity of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in detecting hepatic metastasis (n=101) was higher than for computed tomography (89vs. 71 percent). The sensitivity of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in detecting extrahepatic metastases exclusive of locoregional recurrence (n=101) was higher than for computed tomography plus other conventional diagnostic studies (94vs. 67 percent). 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography altered clinical management in a beneficial manner in 26 percent of cases (26/101) when compared with evaluation by computed tomography plus other conventional diagnostic studies. CONCLUSION: 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is more sensitive than computed tomography for the detection of metastatic or recurrent colorectal cancer and may improve clinical management in one-quarter of cases. However, 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is not as sensitive in detecting mucinous adenocarcinoma, possibly because of the relative hypocellularity of these tumors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Parker SL, Tong T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics, 1997. CA Cancer J Clin 1997;47:5–27.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bruinvels DJ, Stiggelbout AM, Kievit J, van Houwelingen HC, Habbema JD, van de Velde CJ. Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis. Ann Surg 1994;219:174–82.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hughes K, Scheele J, Sugarbaker PH. Surgery for colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver. Optimizing the results of treatment. Surg Clin North Am 1989;69:339–59.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Scheele J, Stang R, Altendorf-Hofmann A, Paul M. Resection of colorectal liver metastases. World J Surg 1995;19:59–71.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Salo JC, Paty PB, Guillem J, Minsky BD, Harrison LB, Cohen AM. Surgical salvage of recurrent rectal carcinoma after curative resection: a 10-year experience. Ann Surg Oncol 1999;6:171–7.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Suzuki K, Dozois RR, Devine RM,et al. Curative reoperations for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:730–6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schoemaker D, Black R, Giles L, Toouli J. Yearly colonoscopy, liver CT, and chest radiography do not influence 5-year survival of colorectal cancer patients. Gastroenterology 1998;114:7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hughes K, Pinsky CM, Petrelli NJ,et al. Use of carcinoembryonic antigen radioimmunodetection and computed tomography for predicting the resectability of recurrent colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 1997;226:621–31.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Freeny PC, Marks WM, Ryan JA, Bolen JW. Colorectal carcinoma evaluation with CT: preoperative staging and detection of postoperative recurrence. Radiology 1986;158:347–53.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Collier BD, Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RJ,et al. Immunoscintigraphy performed with In-111-labeled CYT-103 in the management of colorectal cancer: comparison with CT. Radiology 1992;185:179–86.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chamsangavej C. New imaging modalities for follow-up of colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 1993;71:4236–40.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ohlsson B, Breland U, Ekberg H, Graffner H, Tranberg KG. Follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal carcinoma. Randomized comparison with no follow-up. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:619–26.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wolff BG, Bolton J, Baum R,et al. Radioimmunoscintigraphy of recurrent, metastatic, or occult colorectal cancer with technetium Tc 99m 88BV59H21-2V67-66 (HumaSPECT®-Tc), a totally human monoclonal antibody: patient management benefit from a phase III multicenter study. Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:953–62.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Strauss LG, Clorius JH, Schlag P,et al. Recurrence of colorectal tumors: PET evaluation. Radiology 1989;170:329–32.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RJ, Lamonica DM,et al. Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology 1998;206:755–60.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Beets G, Penninckx F, Schiepers C,et al. Clinical value of whole-body positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 1994;81:1666–70.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lai DT, Fulham M, Stephen MS,et al. The role of whole-body positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in identifying operable colorectal cancer metastases to the liver. Arch Surg 1996;131:703–7.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schiepers C, Penninckx F, De Vadder N,et al. Contribution of PET in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional imaging. Eur J Surg Oncol 1995;21:517–22.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Schlag P, Lehner B, Strauss LG, Georgi P, Herfarth C. Scar or recurrent rectal cancer. Positron emission tomography is more helpful for diagnosis than immunoscintigraphy. Arch Surg 1989;124:197–200.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ogunbiyi OA, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F,et al. Detection of recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer: comparison of positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Ann Surg Oncol 1997;4:613–20.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Flamen P, Stroobants S, Van Cutsem E,et al. Additional value of whole-body positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:894–901.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Valk PE, Abella-Columna E, Haseman MK,et al. Whole-body PET imaging with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in management of recurrent colorectal cancer. Arch Surg 1999;134:503–11.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Fleming ID, ed. AJCC cancer staging manual/American Joint Committee on Cancer. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ogunbiyi OA, McKenna K, Birnbaum EH, Fleshman JW, Kodner IJ. Aggressive surgical management of recurrent rectal cancer—is it worthwhile? Dis Colon Rectum 1997;40:150–5.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Grabbe E, Winkler R. Local recurrence after sphinctersaving resection for rectal and rectosigmoid carcinoma. Value of various diagnostic methods. Radiology 1985;155:305–10.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Chen YM, Ott DJ, Wolfman NT, Gelfand DW, Karsteadt N, Bechtold RE. Recurrent colorectal carcinoma: evaluation with barium enema examination and CT. Radiology 1987;163:307–10.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ruhlmann J, Schomburg A, Bender H,et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer patients studied in routine daily practice. Dis Colon Rectum 1997;40:1195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kim BT, Kim Y, Lee KS,et al. Localized form of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma: FDG PET findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:935–9.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Seki H,et al. Fluorine-18-FDG PET imaging is negative in bronchioloalveolar lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1998;39:1016–20.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Falk PM, Gupta NC, Thorson AG,et al. Positron emission tomography for preoperative staging of colorectal carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:153–6.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F, Ogunbiyi OA, Kodner IJ, Siegel BA. Utility of FDG-PET for investigating unexplained plasma CEA elevation in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 1998;227:319–23.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Dawson PM, Blair SD, Begent RH, Kelly AM, Boxer GM, Theodorou NA. The value of radioimmunoguided surgery in first and second look laparotomy for colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:217–22.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. From the Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

    Mark H. Whiteford M.D., Heather M. Whiteford M.D., Laurence F. Yee M.D., Olagunju A. Ogunbiyi M.D., Elisa H. Birnbaum M.D., James W. Fleshman M.D., Ira J. Kodner M.D. &  Thomas E. Read M.D.

  2. the Division of Nuclear Medicine, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

    Farrokh Dehdashti M.D. & Barry A. Siegel M.D.

Authors
  1. Mark H. Whiteford M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heather M. Whiteford M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laurence F. Yee M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Olagunju A. Ogunbiyi M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Farrokh Dehdashti M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Barry A. Siegel M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Elisa H. Birnbaum M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. James W. Fleshman M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ira J. Kodner M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Thomas E. Read M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Dr. H. M. Whiteford was supported by the Wallace R. Ruwitch Family Research Fund.

Read at The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons' 100th Anniversary and Tripartite Meeting, Washington, DC, May 1 to 6 1999.

About this article

Cite this article

Whiteford, M.H., Whiteford, H.M., Yee, L.F. et al. Usefulness of FDG-PET scan in the assessment of suspected metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum. Dis Colon Rectum 43, 759–767 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02238010

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02238010

Key words

Search

Navigation