Abstract
Objective
2-Fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) imaging is not considered useful for assessing bladder cancer due to the physiological uptake of 18F-FDG in the bladder. Despite reports of the detection of bladder cancer by washing out 18F-FDG from the bladder, such methods are invasive and impractical in the routine practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate prospectively the utility of oral hydration with 500 mL of water and voiding-refilling, a minimally invasive method that we introduced to enable detection of residual invasive bladder cancer on delayed 18F-FDG PET imaging.
Methods
From January 2015 to December 2017, 267 consecutive patients with bladder cancer underwent 18F-FDG PET/computed tomography scans. Among these patients, 25 (19 men and 6 women; mean age, 72.0 ± 11.3 years) were newly diagnosed as having muscle-invasive bladder cancer by transurethral resection of bladder tumor and T3b or T4 by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). All patients were orally hydrated with only 500 mL of water and were then instructed to void frequently for 60 min before early 18F-FDG PET imaging. After the scans, they were instructed to hold their urine for 60 min. Then, delayed imaging was performed. Two radiologists evaluated the early and delayed 18F-FDG PET images to determine whether residual invasive bladder cancer could be detected. The maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of the bladder urine and residual tumor site were also measured on early and delayed images. The maximum diameter of the primary bladder tumor was measured on MRI.
Results
The sensitivity for detecting residual invasive bladder cancer on early and delayed imaging were 24.0 and 92.0%, respectively (P < 0.001). The SUVmax of the bladder urine on the early and delayed imaging were 34.7 ± 29.7 and 16.0 ± 10.7 (mean ± SD), respectively. The SUVmax of the residual tumor site on the early and delayed imaging were range 15.65–30.83 and 10.06–45.70, respectively.
Conclusion
Delayed 18F-FDG PET imaging with oral hydration using only 500 mL of water and voiding-refilling is useful for detecting residual invasive bladder cancer.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kaufman DS, Shipley WU, Feldman AS. Bladder cancer. Lancet. 2009;374(9685):239–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60491-8.
Witjes JA, Comperat E, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Gakis G, Lebret T, et al. EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: summary of the 2013 guidelines. Eur Urol. 2014;65(4):778–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.046.
Azuma H, Yamamoto K, Inamoto T, Ibuki N, Kotake Y, Sakamoto T, et al. Total cystectomy versus bladder preservation therapy for locally invasive bladder cancer: effect of combined therapy using balloon-occluded arterial infusion of anticancer agent and hemodialysis with concurrent radiation. Am J Clin Oncol. 2009;32(6):592–606. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e318199fb42.
Smith ZL, Christodouleas JP, Keefe SM, Malkowicz SB, Guzzo TJ. Bladder preservation in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC): a review of the literature and a practical approach to therapy. BJU Int. 2013;112(1):13–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11762.x.
Zhang J, Gerst S, Lefkowitz RA, Bach A. Imaging of bladder cancer. Radiol Clin N Am. 2007;45(1):183–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2006.10.005.
Kosuda S, Kison PV, Greenough R, Grossman HB, Wahl RL. Preliminary assessment of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with bladder cancer. Eur J Nucl Med. 1997;24(6):615–20.
Mertens LS, Bruin NM, Vegt E, de Blok WM, Fioole-Bruining A, van Rhijn BW, et al. Catheter-assisted 18F-FDG-PET/CT imaging of primary bladder cancer: a prospective study. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33(11):1195–201. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283567473.
Anjos DA, Etchebehere EC, Ramos CD, Santos AO, Albertotti C, Camargo EE. 18F-FDG PET/CT delayed images after diuretic for restaging invasive bladder cancer. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(5):764–70. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.106.036350.
Harkirat S, Anand S, Jacob M. Forced diuresis and dual-phase F-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT scan for restaging of urinary bladder cancers. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2010;20(1):13–9. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-3026.59746.
Nayak B, Dogra PN, Naswa N, Kumar R. Diuretic 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging for detection and locoregional staging of urinary bladder cancer: prospective evaluation of a novel technique. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(3):386–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-012-2294-6.
Yildirim-Poyraz N, Ozdemir E, Uzun B, Turkolmez S. Dual phase 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography with forced diuresis in diagnostic imaging evaluation of bladder cancer. Rev Espanola Med Nucl Image Mol. 2013;32(4):214–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.remn.2012.10.004.
Yang Z, Cheng J, Pan L, Hu S, Xu J, Zhang Y, et al. Is whole-body fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT plus additional pelvic images (oral hydration-voiding-refilling) useful for detecting recurrent bladder cancer? Ann Nucl Med. 2012;26(7):571–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-012-0614-3.
Kubota K, Itoh M, Ozaki K, Ono S, Tashiro M, Yamaguchi K, et al. Advantage of delayed whole-body FDG-PET imaging for tumour detection. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28(6):696–703.
Alfred Witjes J, Lebret T, Comperat EM, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Bruins HM, et al. Updated 2016 EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2017;71(3):462–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.06.020.
Funding
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Higashiyama, A., Komori, T., Juri, H. et al. Detectability of residual invasive bladder cancer in delayed 18F-FDG PET imaging with oral hydration using 500 mL of water and voiding-refilling. Ann Nucl Med 32, 561–567 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-018-1280-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-018-1280-x