Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostik des Bronchialkarzinoms

Positronen-Emissions-Tomographie (PET)

Diagnosis of lung cancer

Positron emission tomography (PET)

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Pneumologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die Positronen-Emissions-Tomographie mit 18F-Desoxyglukose (FDG-PET) ist ein nichtinvasives Verfahren zum sog. metabolischen „Imaging“ des Bronchialkarzinoms. Zwischenzeitlich liegen reichlich Daten hinsichtlich der diagnostischen Aussagekraft des FDG-PET bei der Beurteilung pulmonaler Verschattungen unklarer Dignität sowie zur Darstellung des N- und M-Status vor. Eine differenzierte Indikationsstellung ist notwendig. Das integrierte PET/CT kann die diagnostische Wertigkeit weiter steigern.

Abstract

Positron emission tomography with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG-PET) represents a noninvasive method for the so-called metabolic imaging of lung cancer. Presently, there are numerous data available with respect to the diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET for pulmonary nodules or masses of unknown dignity as well as for N and M status. A rational indication is necessary. An integrated PET/CT (dual modality) may further enhance accuracy.

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. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

  1. 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 

  2. Cheran SK, Nielsen ND, Patz EF (2004) False-negative findings for primary lung tumors on FDG positron emission tomography: staging and prognostic implications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1129–1132

    Google Scholar 

  3. Detterbeck FC, Falen S, Rivera MP et al. (2004) Seeking a Home for a PET, Part 1. Defining the appropriate place for positron emission tomography imaging in the diagnosis of pulmonary nodules or masses. Chest 125:2294–2299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Detterbeck FC, Falen S, Rivera MP et al. (2004) Seeking a Home for a PET, Part 2. Defining the appropriate place for positron emission tomography imaging in the staging of patients with suspected lung cancer. Chest 125:2300–2308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Detterbeck FC, Vansteenkiste JF, Morris DE et al. (2004) Seeking a Home for a PET, Part 3. Defining the appropriate place for positron emission tomography imaging in the management of patients with lung cancer. Chest 126:1656–1666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dietlein M, Weber WA (2003) Positronen-Emissions-Tomographie (PET) mit 18F-Fluordesoxyglukose in der Stadienzuordnung und Therapieentscheidung des nicht-kleinzelligen Bronchialkarzinoms. Stellenwert der PET und der PET/CT-Koregistrierung. Atemw Lungenkr 29:481–490

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dwamena BA, Sonnad SS, Angobaldo JO et al. (1999) Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s; meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT. Radiology 213:530–536

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Franzius C (2004) FDG PET: advantages for staging the mediastinum? Lung Cancer 45 [Suppl.2]:S69–S74

  9. Gould M, Maclean C, WG K et al. (2001) Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: a meta analysis. JAMA 285:914–924

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hellwig D, Ukena D, Paulsen F et al. (2001) Metaanalyse zum Stellenwert der Positronen-Emissions-Tomography mit F-18-Fluorodesoxyglukose (FDG-PET) bei Lungentumoren. Pneumologie 55:367–377

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 348:2500–2507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. MacManus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP et al. (2001) High rate of detection of unsuspected distant metastases per PET in apparent stage III non-small cell lung cancer: implications for radical radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 50:287–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pastorino L, 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 

  14. Pieterman R, VanPutten J, Meuzelaar J et al. (2000) Preoperative staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with positron emission tomography. N Engl J Med 343:254–261

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stroobants S, Verschakelen J, Vansteenkiste J (2003) Value of FDG-PET in the management of non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Radiol 45:49–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Toloza E, Harpole L, McCrory D (2003) Noninvasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer. A review of the current evidence. Chest 123:137S–146S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ukena D, Hellwig D (2004) Value of FDG-PET in the management of NSCLC. Lung Cancer 45 [Suppl.2]:S75–S78

    Google Scholar 

  18. Vansteenkiste JF (2002) Imaging in lung cancer: positron emission tomography scan. Eur Respir J 19 [Suppl.35]:49–60

  19. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG (2001) The role of positron emission tomography with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in respiratory oncology. Eur Respir J 17:802–820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, Dupont PJ et al. (1998) FDG-PET scan in potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: do anatometabolic PET-CT fusion images improve the localisation of regional lymph node metastases? Eur J Nucl Med 25:1495–1501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Vansteenkiste J, Fischer BM, Dooms C et al. (2004) Positron-emission tomography in prognostic and therapeutic assessment of lung cancer: systematic review. Lancet Oncol 5:531–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF et al. (2002) Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 359:1388–1392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Verboom P, van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS et al. (2003) Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30:1444–1449

    Article  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. Klinik für Pneumologie, Klinikum Bremen-Ost

    D. Ukena

  2. Abteilung für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes, Homburg/Saar

    D. Hellwig

  3. Klinik für Pneumologie, Klinikum Bremen-Ost, Züricher Straße 40, 28235 , Bremen

    D. Ukena

Authors
  1. D. Ukena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Hellwig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Ukena.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ukena, D., Hellwig, D. Diagnostik des Bronchialkarzinoms. Pneumologe 2, 111–117 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10405-005-0033-4

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10405-005-0033-4

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation