Difference in F-18 FDG Uptake After Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and Colonoscopy in Healthy Sedated Subjects
We aimed to evaluate the difference in fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in sedated healthy subjects after they underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy procedures.
The endoscopy group (n = 29) included healthy subjects who underwent screening via F-18 FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) after an EGD and/or colonoscopy under sedation on the same day. The control group (n = 35) included healthy subjects who underwent screening via PET/CT only. FDG uptake in the tongue, uvula, epiglottis, vocal cords, esophagus, stomach, duodenum, liver, cecum, colon, anus, and muscle were compared between the two groups.
Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) in the tongue, pharynx, larynx, and esophagus did not significantly differ between the endoscopy and control groups. In contrast, mean SUVmax in the whole stomach was 18 % higher in the endoscopy group than in the control group (SUVmax: 2.96 vs. 2.51, P = 0.010). In the lower gastrointestinal track, SUVmax from the cecum to the rectum was not significantly different between the two groups, whereas SUVmax in the anus was 20 % higher in the endoscopy group than in the control group (SUVmax: 4.21 vs. 3.50, P = 0.002). SUVmax in the liver and muscle was not significantly different between the two groups. Mean volume of the stomach and mean cross section of the colon was significantly higher in the endoscopy group than in the control group (stomach: 313.28 cm3 vs. 209.93 cm3, P < 0.001, colon: 8.82 cm2 vs. 5.98 cm2, P = 0.001).
EGD and colonoscopy under sedation does not lead to significant differences in SUVmax in most parts of the body. Only gastric FDG uptake in the EGD subjects and anal FDG uptake in the colonoscopy subjects was higher than uptake in those regions in the control subjects.
KeywordsColonoscopy Endoscopy Esophagogastroduodenoscopy FDG PET/CT
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Authors JR Oh, JH Seo, WJ Jang, SI Bae, IW Song, JG Bong, HY Jeong, SY Park, J Bae, and H Yoon declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 7.Young B, O’Dowd G, Woodford P. Wheater’s functional histology : a text and colour atlas. Sixth ed. 2014:252.Google Scholar