x
Volume 44 Issue 3
Jul.  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  Journal of Molecular Imaging  > 2021  >  44(3): 435-440
Fen DU, Xiaomao LUO, Ming LIU, Taichuang LI, Wei CHEN, Tingjie ZHANG, Lin LIU, Dehua HUANG, Honghui LU, Ying LIANG. Differential diagnosis value and incremental value of quantitative SPECT/CT (SUVmax) fusion imaging in benign and malignant bone lesions[J]. Journal of Molecular Imaging, 2021, 44(3): 435-440. doi: 10.12122/j.issn.1674-4500.2021.03.04
Citation: Fen DU, Xiaomao LUO, Ming LIU, Taichuang LI, Wei CHEN, Tingjie ZHANG, Lin LIU, Dehua HUANG, Honghui LU, Ying LIANG. Differential diagnosis value and incremental value of quantitative SPECT/CT (SUVmax) fusion imaging in benign and malignant bone lesions[J]. Journal of Molecular Imaging, 2021, 44(3): 435-440. doi: 10.12122/j.issn.1674-4500.2021.03.04
shu

Differential diagnosis value and incremental value of quantitative SPECT/CT (SUVmax) fusion imaging in benign and malignant bone lesions

doi: 10.12122/j.issn.1674-4500.2021.03.04
  • 1.

    Department of Nuclear Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen 518116, China

  • 2.

    Department of Nuclear Medicine, Shenzhen Hospital of the University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen 518000, China

  • 3.

    PET/CT Center, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China

  • Received Date: 2021-04-29
  • Publish Date: 2021-05-20
    Abstract
  • ObjectiveTo investigate the differential diagnosis value and incremental value of the maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) of quantitative SPECT/CT imaging in benign and malignant bone lesions.MethodsFrom April to December in 2019, 124 patients with extraskeletal malignant tumors who underwent whole body bone scan (WBS) and quantitative SPECT/ CT were enrolled. A total of 294 abnormal tracer-positive concentration lesions was detected, and 92 normal vertebras were included as the control group. The differences of SUVmax among the benign, malignant, and control groups were analyzed. All lesions were further divided into two groups: The first group collected 46 cases totaling 108 lesions from April to July in 2019 and plotted ROC curve to obtain cut-off values of SUVmax. The second group prospectively collected 78 cases with 186 lesions from August to December 2019 and compared the diagnostic efficacy between SPECT/CT qualitative analysis and SPECT/CT qualitative+SUVmax quantitative analysis.ResultsUsing pathology and/or follow-up imaging (WBS, CT, MRI and/or PET/CT) for at least 12 months as the golden standard, 137 malignant, and 157 benign lesions were determined. The SUVmax of malignant lesions (27.29±14.44 g/mL) was significantly higher than benign lesions (16.28±10.21 g/mL, P=0.00) and the controls (6.91±1.41 g/mL, P=0.00). Using the cut-off value of SUVmax≥18.2 g/mL as the diagnostic criterion for malignant lesions obtained by the ROC curve in the first group, the sensitivities of SPECT/CT qualitative analysis and SPECT/CT qualitative + SUVmax quantitative analysis were 88.5% and 94.9%; specificities were 93.5%, and 93.5%; accuracies were 91.4% and 94.1%, respectively. The area under curve of ROC curve were 0.91(95% CI: 0.86-0.95) and 0.96(95% CI: 0.94-0.98), respectively, the differences between them were significant (P=0.01).ConclusionQuantitative SPECT/CT SUVmax has important clinical application and incremental value in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant bone lesions.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(23)
  • [1]
    Chang MC, Chen JH, Liang JA, et al. Meta-analysis: comparison of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastasis in patients with lung cancer[J]. Acad Radiol, 2012, 19(3): 349-57. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2011.10.018
    [2]
    Caglar M, Kupik O, Karabulut E, et al. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer patients in the PET/CT era: Do we still need the bone scan?[J]. Revista Española De Med Nucl E Imagen Mol Engl Ed, 2016, 35(1): 3-11. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2253808915001354
    [3]
    Chen XL, Li Q, Cao L, et al. Diagnostic role of (99)Tc(m)-MDP SPECT/CT combined SPECT/MRI Multi modality imaging for early and atypical bone metastases[J]. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2014, 7 (12): 5336-41. http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4307487/
    [4]
    Tomasi G, Turkheimer F, Aboagye E. Importance of quantification for the analysis of PET data in oncology: review of current methods and trends for the future[J]. Mol Imaging Biol, 2012, 14(2): 131-46. doi: 10.1007/s11307-011-0514-2
    [5]
    Lee WW, K-SPECT Group. Clinical applications of technetium- 99m quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography[J]. Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2019, 53(3): 172-81. doi: 10.1007/s13139-019-00588-9
    [6]
    Kitajima K, Futani H, Fujiwara M, et al. Usefulness of quantitative bone single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography for evaluating response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in a patient with periosteal osteosarcoma[J]. Cureus, 2018, 10(11): e3655.
    [7]
    Kitajima K, Tsuchitani T, Takahashi Y, et al. Usefulness of quantitative bone single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography for evaluating the treatment response of bone metastasis in a lung cancer patient[J]. Case Rep Oncol, 2021, 14(1): 391-6. doi: 10.1159/000513907
    [8]
    赵祯, 李林, 李芳兰, 等. SPECT/CT同机融合显像鉴别诊断骨良恶性病灶的价值[J]. 四川大学学报: 医学版, 2008, 39(6): 1036-9. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-173X.2008.06.040
    [9]
    Bailey DL, Willowson KP. An evidence-based review of quantitative SPECT imaging and potential clinical applications[J]. J Nucl Med, 2013, 54(1): 83-9. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.112.111476
    [10]
    Seret A, Nguyen D, Bernard C. Quantitative capabilities of four state-of-the-art SPECT-CT cameras[J]. EJNMMI Res, 2012, 2(1): 45. doi: 10.1186/2191-219X-2-45
    [11]
    Zhang YQ, Li BL, Yu HJ, et al. The value of skeletal standardized uptake values obtained by quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography-computed tomography in differential diagnosis of bone metastases[J]. Nucl Med Commun, 2020, 42(1): 63-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33044406
    [12]
    Qi N, Meng Q, You Z, et al. Standardized Uptake Values of 99mTcMDP in Normal Vertebrae Assessed Using Quantitative SPECT/CT for Differentiation Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Bone Lesions[J]. BMC Med Imaging, 2021, 21(1): 39. doi: 10.1186/s12880-021-00569-5
    [13]
    Arvola S, Jambor I, Kuisma A, et al. Comparison of standardized uptake values between 99mTc-HDP SPECT/CT and 18F-NaF PET/CT in bone metastases of breast and prostate cancer[J]. EJNMMI Res, 2019, 9(1): 6. doi: 10.1186/s13550-019-0475-z
    [14]
    Yamane T, Fukushima K, Shirotake S, et al. Test-retest repeatability of quantitative bone SPECT/CT[J]. Ann Nucl Med, 2021, 35(3): 338-46. doi: 10.1007/s12149-020-01568-2
    [15]
    Suh MS, Lee WW, Kim YK, et al. Maximum standardized uptake value of99mTc hydroxymethylene diphosphonate SPECT/CT for the evaluation of temporomandibular joint disorder[J]. Radiology, 2016, 280(3): 890-6. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016152294
    [16]
    Tofuku K, Koga H, Komiya S. The diagnostic value of singlephoton emission computed tomography/computed tomography for severe sacroiliac joint dysfunction[J]. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(4): 859- 63.
    [17]
    Kitajima K, Futani H, Tsuchitani T, et al. Quantitative bone SPECT/CT applications for cartilaginous bone neoplasms[J]. Hell J Nucl Med, 2020, 23(2): 133-7.
    [18]
    Riaz S, Bashir H, Niazi IK, et al. 99mTc MDP SPECT-CT-based modified mirels classification for evaluation of risk of fracture in skeletal metastasis: a pilot study[J]. Clin Nucl Med, 2018, 43(6): e180-3. doi: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000002057
    [19]
    Tabotta F, Jreige M, Schaefer N, et al. Quantitative bone SPECT/CT: high specificity for identification of prostate cancer bone metastases[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2019, 20(1): 619. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-3001-6
    [20]
    王海岩, 赵军, 孟庆元, 等. SPECT/CT融合骨显像中SUVmax测定对肿瘤患者肋骨转移灶的诊断价值[J]. 肿瘤影像学, 2017, 26(5): 318-21. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXYX201705002.htm
    [21]
    Kaneta T, Ogawa M, Daisaki H, et al. SUV measurement of normal vertebrae using SPECT/CT with Tc-99m methylene diphosphonate [J]. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2016, 6(5): 262-8.
    [22]
    Lassus J, Tulikoura I, Konttinen YT, et al. Bone stress injuries of the lower extremity[J]. Acta Orthop Scand, 2002, 73(3): 359-68. doi: 10.1080/000164702320155392
    [23]
    邓群力, 莫逸, 刘康龙. 99mTc-亚甲基二膦酸盐骨显像评价乳腺癌骨转移的特征[J]. 分子影像学杂志, 2018, 41(3): 316-9. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-FZYX201803007.htm
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(2)  / Tables(1)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (971) PDF downloads(117) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related
    • Copyright © 2013《Journal of Molecular Imaging》 Editorial Office ICP备00000000号
    • Key tip: Adobe Reader6 The full text may be displayed abnormally，Please upgrade to Adobe Reader7Or higher .
    • Address: 1838 North Guangzhou Dadao, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province, China Tel: 020-61648176 E-mail: 

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd  support: info@rhhz.net

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return