SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Medical Journal / 2020 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 4

THE CONTRIBUTION OF LUMBOPELVIC SPECT/CT TO WHOLE BODY SCANNING IN STAGING AND THERAPY MANAGEMENT IN PROSTATE CANCER PATIENTS

PROSTAT KANSERLİ HASTALARDA EVRELEME VETEDAVİ PLANINDA LUMBOPELVİK SPECT/BT’NİN TÜMVÜCUT KEMİK SİNTİGRAFİSİNE KATKISI

Nilüfer YILDIRIM
Pages
1041–1052
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: With WBS, %22.82 of the patients were evaluated as suspicious for metastasis, and this rate decreasedsignificantly with the addition of lumbopelvic SPECT/CT (%22.82 and %7.61; p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: The study aimed to determine the contribution of lumbopelvic SPECT/CT and investigate its effecton management of therapy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: The data of 184 patients were analyzed retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: With WBS, %22.82 of the patients were evaluated as suspicious for metastasis, and this rate decreasedsignificantly with the addition of lumbopelvic SPECT/CT (%22.82 and %7.61; p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to determine the contribution of lumbopelvic SPECT/CT and investigate its effecton management of therapy. Materials and Methods: The data of 184 patients were analyzed retrospectively. All patients were interpretedas normal, benign, suspicious, and metastatic by evaluating WBS, lumbopelvic SPECT/CT, and both. Eachmethod's diagnostic parameters and the contribution of lumbopelvic SPECT/CT to diagnosis and therapymanagement were determined on a patient basis. Results: With WBS, %22.82 of the patients were evaluated as suspicious for metastasis, and this rate decreasedsignificantly with the addition of lumbopelvic SPECT/CT (%22.82 and %7.61; p

Özet

Amaç: Prostat kanserli hastalarda kemik metastaz taramasında lumbopelvik SPECT/BT görüntülemenin TVKS’ye katkısını belirlemek ve tedavi yöntemine etkisini araştırmaktı.Materyal ve Metot: 184 hastanın verileri geriye dönük olarak incelendi. TVKS, lumbopelvik SPECT/BT ve her ikisinin birlikte değerlendirilmesiyle tüm hastalar normal, benign, şüpheli ve metastatik olarak yorumlandı. Her metodun kemik metastazını belirlemedeki tanısal parametreleri hesaplandı. Ayrıca lumbopelvik SPECT/BT’nin hasta bazında tanıya katkısı ve tedavi yönetimine etkisi belirlendi.Bulgular: TVKS ile hastaların %22,82’si metastaz açısından şüpheli olarak değerlendirilmiş olup bu oran lumbopelvik SPECT/BT’nin eklenmesiyle belirgin olarak düşmüştür (%22,82 ve %7,61; p

🔖

Cite This Article

YILDIRIM, N. (2022). THE CONTRIBUTION OF LUMBOPELVIC SPECT/CT TO WHOLE BODY SCANNING IN STAGING AND THERAPY MANAGEMENT IN PROSTATE CANCER PATIENTS. Ankara Medical Journal, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 4, 1041–1052. https://ajindex.com/articles/441775

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB, ve ark. The Eighth Edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more “personalized” approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(2):93–9
  2. Attard G, Parker C, Eeles RA, ve ark. Prostate cancer. The Lancet. 2016;387:70-82
  3. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, ve ark. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71(4):618–29
  4. Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, ve ark. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: Treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2014;65(2):467–79
  5. Pesapane F, Czarniecki M, Suter MB, Turkbey B, Villeirs G. Imaging of distant metastases of prostate cancer. Med Oncol. 2018;35(11):0. (İnternet) http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1208-2 (Erişim Tarihi: 01.10.2020)
  6. Van Den Wyngaert T, Strobel K, Kampen WU, ve ark. The EANM practice guidelines for bone scintigraphy On behalf of the EANM Bone & Joint Committee and the Oncology Committee. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1723–38
  7. Horwich A, Hugosson J, de reijke T, ve ark. Prostate cancer: ESMO consensus conference guidelines 2012. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24(5):1141-62
  8. Jambor I, Kuisma A, Ramadan S, ve ark. Prospective evaluation of planar bone scintigraphy, SPECT, SPECT/CT, 18F-NaF PET/CT and whole body 1.5T MRI, including DWI, for the detection of bone metastases in high risk breast and prostate cancer patients: SKELETA clinical trial. Acta Oncol. 2016;55(1):59–67
  9. Iqbal B, Currie GM, Wheat JM, Raza H, Kiat H. The incremental value of SPECT/CT in characterizing solitary spine lesions. J Nucl Med Technol. 2011;39(3):201–7
  10. Zhang Y, Shi H, Li B, Cai L, Gu Y, Xiu Y. The added value of SPECT/spiral CT in patients with equivocal bony metastasis from hepatocellular carcinoma. Nuklearmedizin. 2015;54(06):255–61
  11. Maurer AH. 2013 SNMMI Highlights Lecture: General clinical nuclear medicine: clinical SPECT/CT--time for a new standard of care. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(10):19–28
  12. Bozkurt MF, Demir H, Şanlı Y, ve ark. TSNM, SPECT-CT Hybrid Imaging Procedure Guideline for Tumour Imaging. Nucl Med Semin. 2015;1(1):57–61
  13. Ceylan Y, Özcan Z. Prostat Kanseri Kemik Metastazlarının Saptanmasında Konvansiyonel Tc-99m MDP Kemik Sintigrafisinden SPECT/BT’ye Geçiş ve Kazanımları. Türkiye Klin Nükleer Tıp - Özel Konular. 2019;5(1):1–6
  14. Israel O, Pellet O, Biassoni