What Does PET Imaging Add to Conventional Staging of Head and Neck Cancer Patients?

Journal Article · Fri Jun 01 04:00:00 EDT 2007 · International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044· OSTI ID:20951656

Pohar, Surjeet ^[1]; Brown, Robert B.S. ^[2]; Newman, Nancy ^[3]; Koniarczyk, Michael ^[2]; Hsu, Jack ^[4]; Feiglin, David ^[5]

---

1. Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States) and Department of Radiation Oncology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA (United States)
2. Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
3. Department of Medicine, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
4. Department of Otolaryngology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
5. Department of Radiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)

Purpose: To determine the value of PET scans in the staging of patients with head and neck carcinoma. Methods and Materials: The charts of 25 patients who underwent neck dissection, computed tomography (CT) scan, and F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging as part of their initial work-up for a head and neck squamous cell cancer between 2000-2003 were reviewed. All patients underwent clinical examination, triple endoscopy, and chest radiograph as part of their clinical staging, adhering to American Joint Commission for Cancer criteria. In addition to the clinical nodal (N) stage, PET findings were incorporated to determine a second type of N staging: clinical N + PET stage. The number of neck sides and nodal levels involved on CT or PET and on pathologic examination were recorded. Results: The sensitivity and specificity for detection of nodal disease were similar for CT and FDG-PET. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were similar for both diagnostic tests. None of our 25 patients had unsuspected distant disease detected by PET. Conclusion: The addition of PET imaging did not improve diagnostic accuracy in our patients compared with CT. PET scanning did not alter clinical management in any of the patients.

• OSTI ID: 20951656
• Journal Information: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics Journal Issue: 2 Vol. 68; ISSN IOBPD3; ISSN 0360-3016
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE
ACCURACY
CARCINOMAS
CHEST
COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY
FLUORINE 18
FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE
HEAD
IMAGES
NECK
PATIENTS
POSITRON COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY
SENSITIVITY
SPECIFICITY