Buscar en
Medicina Clínica (English Edition)
Toda la web
Inicio Medicina Clínica (English Edition) Evaluation of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients with 64-slice multidetector...
Journal Information
Vol. 151. Issue 7.
Pages 255-264 (October 2018)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
ePub
Visits
0
Vol. 151. Issue 7.
Pages 255-264 (October 2018)
Original article
DOI: 10.1016/j.medcle.2018.08.003
Evaluation of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients with 64-slice multidetector computed tomography versus 18FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography in initial staging and restaging after treatment
Evaluación de la estadificación inicial y la respuesta final al tratamiento de los pacientes con linfoma difuso de célula grande B con la tomografía computarizada de 64 detectores frente a la 18FDG tomografía por emisión de positrones/tomografía computarizada
Visits
...
Nieves Gómez Leóna,b, Gema Vegaa,c, Beatriz Rodríguez-Vigil Juncod,
Corresponding author
beatrizrodriguezvigil@yahoo.es

Corresponding author.
, Carlos Suevos Ballesterosa,b
a Instituto de Investigación, Servicio de Radiología del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain
b Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
c Servicio de Medicina Intensiva del Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain
d Osatek RM. Hospital Universitario de Álava, Vitoria, Spain
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Figures (3)
Show moreShow less
Tables (3)
Table 1. Comparability between groups.
Table 2. Results in the initial staging and final response with 64MDCT and 18FDG PET/CT compared with the reference standard.
Table 3. Results of extranodal and bone marrow involvement with 64MDCT and 18FDG PET/CT compared with the reference standard.
Show moreShow less
Abstract
Background and objectives

To prospectively compare the accuracy in initial staging and end-of-treatment restaging of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) between 64-slice multidetector computed tomography (64MDCT) and 18FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18FGD PET/CT) with intravenous contrast injection.

Material and methods

Randomized and blind controlled clinical multicentric trial that included biopsy-proven DLBCL patients. Seventy-two patients from five different hospitals in the region of Madrid, Spain, were enrolled in the study between January 2012 and June 2015. Thirty-six were randomly allocated to 18FDG PET/TC and the other 36–64MDCT for initial staging and end-of-treatment restaging. A nuclear medicine physician and a radiologist independently analyzed 18FDG PET/TC images and reached an agreement post hoc. 64MDCT images were separately evaluated by a different radiologist. Every set of images was compared to the reference standard that included clinical data, complementary tests and follow-up. The study was approved by participating centres’ ethics committees and written informed consent was obtained from all the participants.

Results

A good agreement was observed between both diagnostic techniques and the reference standard in initial staging [18FDG PET/CT (k=0.5) and 64MDCT (k=0.6)], although only the 18FDG PET/TC showed a good agreement with the reference standard for the end-of-treatment restaging (k=0.7).

Conclusion

In DLBCL, both 18FDG PET/TC and 64MDCT have shown good agreement with the reference standard in initial staging. Nevertheless, 18FDG PET/CT has shown to be superior to 64MDCT in end-of-treatment response assessment.

Keywords:
FDG-PET/CT
CT
Lymphoma
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
Resumen
Fundamento y objetivos

Comparar prospectivamente la exactitud diagnóstica de la tomografía computarizada de 64 detectores (TCMD64) y la tomografía por emisión de positrones/tomografía computarizada (18FDG PET/TC) con contraste intravenoso en pacientes con linfoma difuso de células grandes B (LDCGB) en la estadificación inicial y en la evaluación de la respuesta al final del tratamiento.

Material y métodos

Ensayo clínico controlado multicéntrico que incluyó 72 pacientes de 5 hospitales de la Comunidad de Madrid entre enero de 2012 y junio de 2015, aleatorizados de forma ciega a una diferente prueba de imagen inicial y final, 36 a 18FDG PET/TC y 36 a TCMD64. Un médico nuclear y un radiólogo interpretaron la 18FDG PET/TC de manera independiente, llegando a un consenso post hoc. Por otro lado, un radiólogo ajeno interpretó la TCMD64 por separado. El patrón de referencia incluyó datos clínicos, pruebas complementarias y seguimiento. El Comité Ético de cada hospital aprobó el estudio y los sujetos firmaron su consentimiento por escrito.

Resultados

Se observó buena concordancia de ambas pruebas diagnósticas con el patrón de referencia en la estadificación inicial (18FDG PET/CT [k=0,5] y TCMD64 [k=0,6]), existiendo solo buena concordancia en la evaluación de la respuesta al final del tratamiento con la 18FDG PET/TC (k=0,7).

Conclusión

En la estadificación inicial de pacientes con LDCGB existe un grado de acuerdo satisfactorio de la 18FDG PET/TC y la TCMD64 con el patrón de referencia, mientras que en la evaluación de la respuesta al final del tratamiento la 18FDG PET/TC es superior a la TCMD64.

Palabras clave:
FDG-PET/TC
TC
Linfoma
Linfoma no Hodgkin

Article

These are the options to access the full texts of the publication Medicina Clínica (English Edition)
Subscriber
Subscriber

If you already have your login data, please click here .

If you have forgotten your password you can you can recover it by clicking here and selecting the option “I have forgotten my password”
Subscribe
Subscribe to

Medicina Clínica (English Edition)

Purchase
Purchase article

Purchasing article the PDF version will be downloaded

Price 19.34 €

Purchase now
Contact
Phone for subscriptions and reporting of errors
From Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. (GMT + 1) except for the months of July and August which will be from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Calls from Spain
932 415 960
Calls from outside Spain
+34 932 415 960
E-mail
Article options
Tools
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos