BibTex RIS Cite

The Situations Which May Cause False-Negative Results in Oncological FDG-PET/CT Practice

Year 2017, , 23 - 24, 01.01.2017
https://doi.org/10.5455/umj.20170213045950

References

  • 1. Ayaz S. Letter to editor: FDG-PET/CT evaluation of breast cancer. Ulutas Med J 2016; 2: 157−8.
  • 2. Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 328–54.
  • 3. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, Brown ML, Royal HD,Siegel BA, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 885−95.
  • 4. Glazer ES, Beaty K, Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Curley SA. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography for predicting chemotherapy response in colorectal cancer liver metastases. Arch Surg 2010; 145: 340−5.
  • 5. De Iaco P, Musto A, Orazi L, Zamagni C, Rosati M, Allegri V, et al. FDG-PET/CT in advanced ovarian cancer staging: value and pitfalls in detecting lesions in different abdominal and pelvic quadrants compared with laparoscopy. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80: e98−103.
  • 6. Mani N, George MM, Nash L, Anwar B, Homer JJ. Role of 18-Fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomographycomputed tomography and subsequent panendoscopy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary. Laryngoscope 2016; 126: 1354−8.
  • 7. Noble F, Bailey D; SWCIS Upper Gastrointestinal Tumour Panel, Tung K, Byrne JP. Impact of integrated PET/CT in the staging of oesophageal cancer: a UK population-based cohort study. Clin Radiol 2009; 64: 699−705.
  • 8. Wu HB, Wang L, Wang QS, Han YJ, Li HS, Zhou WL, et al. Adenocarcinoma with BAC features presented as the nonsolid nodule is prone to be false-negative on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 243681.
  • 9. Aquino SL, Halpern EF, Kuester LB, Fischman AJ. FDG-PET and CT features of non-small cell lung cancer based on tumor type. Int J Mol Med 2007; 19: 495−9.
  • 10. Dammacco F, Rubini G, Ferrari C, Vacca A, Racanelli V. ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT: a review of diagnostic and prognostic features in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Clin Exp Med 2015; 15: 1−18.
  • 11. Huyge V, Garcia C, Vanderstappen A, Alexiou J, Gil T, Flamen P. Progressive osteoblastic bone metastases in breast cancer negative on FDG-PET. Clin Nucl Med 2009; 34: 417−20.
Year 2017, , 23 - 24, 01.01.2017
https://doi.org/10.5455/umj.20170213045950

References

  • 1. Ayaz S. Letter to editor: FDG-PET/CT evaluation of breast cancer. Ulutas Med J 2016; 2: 157−8.
  • 2. Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 328–54.
  • 3. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, Brown ML, Royal HD,Siegel BA, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 885−95.
  • 4. Glazer ES, Beaty K, Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Curley SA. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography for predicting chemotherapy response in colorectal cancer liver metastases. Arch Surg 2010; 145: 340−5.
  • 5. De Iaco P, Musto A, Orazi L, Zamagni C, Rosati M, Allegri V, et al. FDG-PET/CT in advanced ovarian cancer staging: value and pitfalls in detecting lesions in different abdominal and pelvic quadrants compared with laparoscopy. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80: e98−103.
  • 6. Mani N, George MM, Nash L, Anwar B, Homer JJ. Role of 18-Fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomographycomputed tomography and subsequent panendoscopy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary. Laryngoscope 2016; 126: 1354−8.
  • 7. Noble F, Bailey D; SWCIS Upper Gastrointestinal Tumour Panel, Tung K, Byrne JP. Impact of integrated PET/CT in the staging of oesophageal cancer: a UK population-based cohort study. Clin Radiol 2009; 64: 699−705.
  • 8. Wu HB, Wang L, Wang QS, Han YJ, Li HS, Zhou WL, et al. Adenocarcinoma with BAC features presented as the nonsolid nodule is prone to be false-negative on 18F-FDG PET/CT. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 243681.
  • 9. Aquino SL, Halpern EF, Kuester LB, Fischman AJ. FDG-PET and CT features of non-small cell lung cancer based on tumor type. Int J Mol Med 2007; 19: 495−9.
  • 10. Dammacco F, Rubini G, Ferrari C, Vacca A, Racanelli V. ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT: a review of diagnostic and prognostic features in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Clin Exp Med 2015; 15: 1−18.
  • 11. Huyge V, Garcia C, Vanderstappen A, Alexiou J, Gil T, Flamen P. Progressive osteoblastic bone metastases in breast cancer negative on FDG-PET. Clin Nucl Med 2009; 34: 417−20.
There are 11 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Editorial
Authors

Sevin Ayaz

Publication Date January 1, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017

Cite

Vancouver Ayaz S. The Situations Which May Cause False-Negative Results in Oncological FDG-PET/CT Practice. ULUTAS MED J. 2017;3(1):23-4.