Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ganzkörpertumorstaging: MRT oder FDG-PET/CT?

Whole-body tumor staging: MRI or FDG-PET/CT?

  • Ganzkörper-MRT
  • Published:
Der Radiologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Technische Neuerungen, wie die Verfügbarkeit beweglicher Tischaufsätze oder die Einführung von 32-Kanal-Systemen, haben die Ganzkörperbildgebung mit der MRT ermöglicht. Die Entwicklung kombinierter PET/CT-Systeme bereitet den Weg für eine simultane Akquisition morphologischer und funktioneller Datensätze und bietet so ebenfalls eine interessante Modalität für den Einsatz zum Ganzkörpertumorstaging in einem Untersuchungsgang. Da eine stadienadaptierte Therapie die Überlebensdauer und -qualität der Patienten verbessert, ist die entscheidende Frage bei einem Vergleich beider Untersuchungsmodalitäten die jeweilige Genauigkeit bei der Beurteilung des TNM-Stadiums. Der vorliegende Beitrag erläutert die Wertigkeiten der Ganzkörper-MRT und der Ganzkörper-FDG-PET/CT bei der Beurteilung des TNM-Stadiums verschiedener maligner Erkrankungen.

Abstract

Technical innovations such as the availability of movable patient platforms and the introduction of 32-channel systems have made whole-body MRI for tumor staging feasible. In addition, the development of dual-modality PET/CT systems offers the opportunity to perform anatometabolic tumor staging with whole-body coverage in a single session. Based on an increase in patient survival when applying a stage-adapted therapy in different malignant diseases the relevant question relates to the accuracies of whole-body MRI and whole-body PET/CT for TNM staging. This review article addresses whole-body tumor staging with MRI and FDG-PET/CT with special emphasis on diagnostic accuracies for staging different malignant diseases.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3a, b
Abb. 4a, b
Abb. 5a, b

Literatur

  1. Adams S, Baum R, Rink T, Schumm-Drager PM, Usadel KH, Hor G (1998) Limited value of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the imaging of neuroendocrine tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 25(1):79–83

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS et al. (2003) Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 290(24):3199–3206

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Antoch G, Stattaus J, Nemat AT et al. (2003) Non-small cell lung cancer: dual-modality PET/CT in preoperative staging. Radiology 229:526–533

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Antoch G, Kuehl H, Kanja J et al. (2004) Dual-modality PET/CT scanning with negative oral contrast agent to avoid artifacts: introduction and evaluation. Radiology 230(3):879–885

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barkhausen J, Quick HH, Lauenstein T et al. (2001) Whole-body MR imaging in 30 seconds with real-time true FISP and a continuously rolling table platform: feasibility study. Radiology 220(1):252–256

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T et al. (2000) A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 41(8):1369–1379

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bockisch A, Brandt-Mainz K, Gorges R, Muller S, Stattaus J, Antoch G (2003) Diagnosis in medullary thyroid cancer with [18F]FDG-PET and improvement using a combined PET/CT scanner. Acta Med Austriaca 30(1):22–25

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cerny T, Gillessen S (2002) Advances in the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol 13 [suppl 4]:211–216

    Google Scholar 

  9. Daldrup-Link HE, Franzius C, Link TM et al. (2001) Whole-body MR imaging for detection of bone metastases in children and young adults: comparison with skeletal scintigraphy and FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177(1):229–236

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Deslauriers J, Gregoire J (2000) Clinical and surgical staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 117(4) [suppl 1]:96S–103S

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ferraris R, del Piano A, Galli JJ (2001) Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the staging of gastrointestinal neoplasms. Semin Surg Oncol 20(2):122–129

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Forastiere A, Koch W, Trotti A, Sidransky D (2001) Head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 345(26):1890–1900

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Wagner-Bohn A et al. (2002) FDG-PET for detection of recurrences from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with conventional imaging. Ann Oncol 13(1):157–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gdeedo A, van Schil P, Corthouts B, van Mieghem F, van Meerbeeck J, van Marck E (1997) Comparison of imaging TNM [(i)TNM] and pathological TNM [pTNM] in staging of bronchogenic carcinoma. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 12(2):224–227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gould MK, Maclean CC, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, Owens DK (2001) Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: a meta-analysis. JAMA 285(7):914–924

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Haberkorn U, Schoenberg SO (2001) Imaging of lung cancer with CT, MRT and PET. Lung Cancer 34 [suppl 3]:S13–23

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kinkel K, Lu Y, Both M, Warren RS, Thoeni RF (2002) Detection of hepatic metastases from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MR imaging, PET): a meta-analysis. Radiology 224(3):748–756

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF et al. (2003) Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med 348(25):2500–2507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Layer G, Steudel A, Schuller H et al. (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging to detect bone marrow metastases in the initial staging of small cell lung carcinoma and breast carcinoma. Cancer 85(4):1004–1009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Michel SC, Keller TM, Frohlich JM et al. (2002) Preoperative breast cancer staging: MR imaging of the axilla with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide enhancement. Radiology 225(2):527–536

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C et al. (2003) Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet 362:593–597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pieterman RM, van Putten JW, Meuzelaar JJ et al. (2000) Preoperative staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography. N Engl J Med 343(4):254–261

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D et al. (2001) Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 218(3):776–782

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Reske SN, Kotzerke J (2001) FDG-PET for clinical use. Results of the 3rd German Interdisciplinary Consensus Conference, „Onko-PET III“, 21 July and 19 September 2000. Eur J Nucl Med 28(11):1707–1723

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Semelka RC, Worawattanakul S, Kelekis NL et al. (1997) Liver lesion detection, characterization, and effect on patient management: comparison of single-phase spiral CT and current MR techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging 7(6):1040–1047

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Smythe WR (2001) Treatment of stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer. Cancer Control 8(4):318–325

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Staples CA, Muller NL, Miller RR, Evans KG, Nelems B (1988) Mediastinal nodes in bronchogenic carcinoma: comparison between CT and mediastinoscopy. Radiology 167(2):367–372

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Teefey SA, Hildeboldt CC, Dehdashti F et al. (2003) Detection of primary hepatic malignancy in liver transplant candidates: prospective comparison of CT, MR imaging, US, and PET. Radiology 226(2):533–542

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Walker RE, Eustace SJ (2001) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging: techniques, clinical indications, and future applications. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 5(1):5–20

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wudel LJ jr, Delbeke D, Morris D et al. (2003) The role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Am Surg 69(2):117–124; discussion 124–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt:

Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Essen

    G. Antoch, F. M. Vogt & S. G. Ruehm

  2. Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Essen

    A. Bockisch

  3. Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum, Hufelandstraße 55, 45122 , Essen

    G. Antoch

Authors
  1. G. Antoch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. M. Vogt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Bockisch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. G. Ruehm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Antoch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Antoch, G., Vogt, F.M., Bockisch, A. et al. Ganzkörpertumorstaging: MRT oder FDG-PET/CT?. Radiologe 44, 882–888 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-004-1093-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-004-1093-x

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation