XXXX in Primary @entity43 : Comparison Between MDCT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET/CT.

@entity43 @entity1 @entity5 @entity298
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare multidetector CT (MDCT), MRI, and FDG PET/CT imaging for the @entity298 ( @entity298 ) in @entity43 . @entity1 AND METHODS: Fifteen @entity1 with @entity43 and suspected @entity298 underwent MDCT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT, shortly before surgery. Nine abdominopelvic regions were defined according to the peritoneal @entity5 index. We applied lesion size scores on MDCT and MR and measured FDG PET/CT standard uptake. We blindly read MDCT, MR, and PET/CT before joint review and comparison with histopathology. Receiver operating characteristics analysis was performed. RESULTS: Ten @entity1 had @entity298 (67%). Altogether, 135 abdominopelvic sites were compared. Multidetector CT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT had a sensitivity of 96%, 98%, and 95%, and specificity was 92%, 84%, and 96%, respectively. Corresponding receiver operating characteristics area was 0.94, 0.90, and 0.96, respectively, without any significant differences between them (P = 0.12). FDG PET/CT detected supradiaphragmatic disease in 3 @entity1 (20%) not seen by MDCT or MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI had the highest sensitivity and FDG PET/CT had the highest specificity, no significant differences were found between the 3 techniques. Thus, MDCT, as the fastest, most economical, and most widely available modality, is the examination of choice, if a stand-alone technique is required. If inconclusive, PET/CT or MRI may offer additional insights. Whole-body FDG PET/CT may be more accurate for supradiaphragmatic metastatic extension.
