Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic Value of FDG-PET/CT for Lymph Node Metastasis of Colorectal Cancer

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Lymph node metastasis is an important prognostic factor in patients with colorectal cancer. We assessed the ability of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) to diagnose lymph node metastases in colorectal cancer patients.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the records of 473 patients who underwent preoperative FDG-PET/CT, followed by curative surgery for colorectal cancer. Lymph node metastases were assessed as proximal or distal, depending on their anatomical location. We analyzed the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of FDG-PET/CT and CT for detecting lymph node metastases.

Results

In detecting proximal lymph nodes, FDG-PET/CT had a sensitivity of 66 %, a specificity of 60 %, a PPV of 63 %, an NPV of 62 %, and an accuracy of 63 %; whereas CT had a sensitivity of 87 %, a specificity of 29 %, a PPV of 57 %, an NPV of 68 %, and an accuracy of 59 % (P = 0.245). FDG-PET/CT and CT also showed similar accuracy in detecting distal lymph nodes (87 vs. 88 %, P = 0.620).

Conclusion

Preoperative FDG-PET/CT and CT have comparable accuracy in detecting lymph node metastases of colorectal cancer.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cohen AM, Tremiterra S, Candela F et al (1991) Prognosis of node-positive colon cancer. Cancer 67:1859–1861

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. O’Dwyer ST, Haboubi NY, Johnson JS et al (2001) Detection of lymph node metastases in colorectal carcinoma. Colorectal Dis 3:288–294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bipat S, Glas AS, Slors FJ et al (2004) Rectal cancer: local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging—a meta-analysis. Radiology 232:773–783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Heriot AG, Grundy A, Kumar D (1999) Preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma. Br J Surg 86:17–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Shin SS, Jeong YY, Min JJ et al (2008) Preoperative staging of colorectal cancer: CT versus integrated FDG PET/CT. Abdom Imaging 33:270–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Park IJ, Kim HC, Yu CS et al (2006) Efficacy of PET/CT in the accurate evaluation of primary colorectal carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 32:941–947

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Erturk SM, Ichikawa T, Fujii H et al (2006) PET imaging for evaluation of metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver. Eur J Radiol 58:229–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RJ, Lamonica DM et al (1998) Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology 206:755–760

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Kantorova I, Lipska L, Belohlavek O et al (2003) Routine [18]F-FDG PET preoperative staging of colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional staging and its impact on treatment decision making. J Nucl Med 44:1784–1788

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L et al (2003) Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 44:1200–1209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ell PJ (2006) The contribution of PET/CT to improved patient management. Br J Radiol 79:32–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J et al (2003) Direct comparison of [18]F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 44:1797–1803

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Selzner M, Hany TF, Wildbrett P et al (2004) Does the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver? Ann Surg 240:1027–1034 discussion 1035–1026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (2006) Japanese classification of colorectal carcinoma. Kanehara, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  15. Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H et al (2004) Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: comparison with CT and PET. J Clin Oncol 22:4357–4368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Niekel MC, Bipat S, Stoker J (2010) Diagnostic imaging of colorectal liver metastases with CT, MR imaging, FDG PET, and/or FDG PET/CT: a meta-analysis of prospective studies including patients who have not previously undergone treatment. Radiology 257:674–684

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Avril N (2004) GLUT1 expression in tissue and [18]F-FDG uptake. J Nucl Med 45:930–932

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Inoue K, Sato T, Kitamura H et al (2008) Improvement of the diagnostic accuracy of lymph node metastases of colorectal cancer in 18F-FDG-PET/CT by optimizing the iteration number for the image reconstruction. Ann Nucl Med 22:465–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dukes CE, Bussey HJ (1958) The spread of rectal cancer and its effect on prognosis. Br J Cancer 12:309–320

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hermanek P, Altendorf A (1981) Classification of colorectal carcinomas with regional lymphatic metastases. Pathol Res Pract 173:1–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim JS, Sohn DK, Park JW et al (2011) Prognostic significance of distribution of lymph node metastasis in advanced mid or low rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 104:486–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sugihara K, Kobayashi H, Kato T et al (2006) Indication and benefit of pelvic sidewall dissection for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1663–1672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Di Matteo G, Mascagni D, Tarroni D (1991) Radical surgery for rectal cancer. J Surg Oncol Suppl 2:32–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Leggeri A, Roseano M, Balani A et al (1994) Lumboaortic and iliac lymphadenectomy: what is the role today? Dis Colon Rectum 37:S54–S61

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hojo K, Sawada T, Moriya Y (1989) An analysis of survival and voiding, sexual function after wide iliopelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with carcinoma of the rectum, compared with conventional lymphadenectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 32:128–133

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Blodgett TM, Meltzer CC, Townsend DW (2007) PET/CT: form and function. Radiology 242:360–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fong Y, Saldinger PF, Akhurst T et al (1999) Utility of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography scanning on selection of patients for resection of hepatic colorectal metastases. Am J Surg 178:282–287

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Desai DC, Zervos EE, Arnold MW et al (2003) Positron emission tomography affects surgical management in recurrent colorectal cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 10:59–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Truant S, Huglo D, Hebbar M et al (2005) Prospective evaluation of the impact of [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography of resectable colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg 92:362–369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. 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 

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

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Chowdhury FU, Shah N, Scarsbrook AF et al (2010) [18F]FDG PET/CT imaging of colorectal cancer: a pictorial review. Postgrad Med J 86:174–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wong JH, Severino R, Honnebier MB et al (1999) Number of nodes examined and staging accuracy in colorectal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 17:2896–2900

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Goldstein NS (2002) Lymph node recoveries from 2427 pT3 colorectal resection specimens spanning 45 years: recommendations for a minimum number of recovered lymph nodes based on predictive probabilities. Am J Surg Pathol 26:179–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Le Voyer TE, Sigurdson ER, Hanlon AL et al (2003) Colon cancer survival is associated with increasing number of lymph nodes analyzed: a secondary survey of intergroup trial INT-0089. J Clin Oncol 21:2912–2919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pusztaszeri M, Matter M, Kuonen A et al (2009) Nodal staging in colorectal cancer: should distant lymph nodes be recovered in surgical specimens? Hum Pathol 40:552–557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Smith NJ, Bees N, Barbachano Y et al (2007) Preoperative computed tomography staging of nonmetastatic colon cancer predicts outcome: implications for clinical trials. Br J Cancer 96:1030–1036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. McDaniel KP, Charnsangavej C, DuBrow RA et al (1993) Pathways of nodal metastasis in carcinomas of the cecum, ascending colon, and transverse colon: CT demonstration. AJR Am J Roentgenol 161:61–64

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Granfield CA, Charnsangavej C, Dubrow RA et al (1992) Regional lymph node metastases in carcinoma of the left side of the colon and rectum: CT demonstration. AJR Am J Roentgenol 159:757–761

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Pomerri F, Maretto I, Pucciarelli S et al (2009) Prediction of rectal lymph node metastasis by pelvic computed tomography measurement. Eur J Surg Oncol 35:168–173

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Dighe S, Swift I, Brown G (2008) CT staging of colon cancer. Clin Radiol 63:1372–1379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Adams MC, Turkington TG, Wilson JM et al (2010) A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:310–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The current work was supported by grants to JCK from the Asan Institute for Life Sciences (2011-069), the Korea Health 21 R&D Project (A062254), and the Center for Development and Commercialization of Anti-Cancer Therapeutics (A102059), Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs, Republic of Korea.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea

    Jae Young Kwak, Chang Sik Yu & Jin Cheon Kim

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea

    Jae Seung Kim

  3. Department of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea

    Hye Jin Kim & Hyun Kwon Ha

  4. Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 86 Asanbyeongwon-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Korea

    Jin Cheon Kim

Authors
  1. Jae Young Kwak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jae Seung Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hye Jin Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hyun Kwon Ha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chang Sik Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jin Cheon Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jin Cheon Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kwak, J.Y., Kim, J.S., Kim, H.J. et al. Diagnostic Value of FDG-PET/CT for Lymph Node Metastasis of Colorectal Cancer. World J Surg 36, 1898–1905 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1575-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1575-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation