TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of MR and PET imaging for the evaluation of liver metastases
AU - Yang, Ming
AU - Martin, Diego R.
AU - Karabulut, Nevzat
AU - Frick, Mathis P.
PY - 2003/3/1
Y1 - 2003/3/1
N2 - Purpose: To compare the accuracy of fluoro-18-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and dynamic-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the diagnosis of liver metastatic lesions from colon and other sources. Materials and Methods: Thirty consecutive patients with known or suspected metastatic lesions were scanned by both MRI and PET. Histopathology and/or clinical outcome, including cross-sectional imaging follow up, were used as a gold standard. Results: Of 30 patients, 16 were positive by pathology and/or clinical outcome and 14 were negative for liver metastases. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values on MRI were 85.7%, 100%, 100%, and 89%, respectively, compared to 71%, 93.7%, 90.9%, and 79% on FDG-PET. The difference between the two methods was not significant (X2 = 0.2, P > 0.05). Conclusion: Our study showed no significant difference in detection of liver metastases using MRI or FDG-PET. However, MRI has advantages in spatial resolution and lesion characterization.
AB - Purpose: To compare the accuracy of fluoro-18-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and dynamic-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in the diagnosis of liver metastatic lesions from colon and other sources. Materials and Methods: Thirty consecutive patients with known or suspected metastatic lesions were scanned by both MRI and PET. Histopathology and/or clinical outcome, including cross-sectional imaging follow up, were used as a gold standard. Results: Of 30 patients, 16 were positive by pathology and/or clinical outcome and 14 were negative for liver metastases. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values on MRI were 85.7%, 100%, 100%, and 89%, respectively, compared to 71%, 93.7%, 90.9%, and 79% on FDG-PET. The difference between the two methods was not significant (X2 = 0.2, P > 0.05). Conclusion: Our study showed no significant difference in detection of liver metastases using MRI or FDG-PET. However, MRI has advantages in spatial resolution and lesion characterization.
KW - FDG-PET
KW - Liver lesions
KW - MRI
KW - Malignancy
KW - Metastatic
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037370030&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037370030&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jmri.10265
DO - 10.1002/jmri.10265
M3 - Article
C2 - 12594725
AN - SCOPUS:0037370030
SN - 1053-1807
VL - 17
SP - 343
EP - 349
JO - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
JF - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
IS - 3
ER -