A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Clinical utility and limitations of FDG PET in detecting recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma in postoperative patients. | LitMetric

Background: The clinical usefulness of positron emission tomography (PET) with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) for the detection of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial because HCC displays varying FDG avidity. The purposes of this study were to re-evaluate the utility of FDG PET for the detection of recurrent HCC, and to assess its prognostic value in a large series of postoperative patients.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 113 scans in 86 patients undergoing FDG PET after curative surgery for HCC. These scans were performed for suspected recurrence on radiologic imaging (group A: n = 44) because of an elevated tumor marker level with negative prior imaging results (group B: n = 32) or with no suspicion of recurrence (group C: n = 37). FDG PET's accuracy for recurrence detection and its value as a predictor of survival were assessed.

Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were 53, 100, and 55 % for group A; 34, 100, and 41 % for group B; and 11, 100, and 78 % for group C, respectively. A change in therapy resulted from the scan results in 7, 9, and 8 % in groups A, B, and C, respectively. The combined sensitivities for intra- and extrahepatic recurrence were 30 and 42 %, respectively. Histopathological features at initial surgery did not affect the sensitivity. The overall survival of patients with positive scans was significantly poorer than that of patients with negative scans (P = 0.008).

Conclusions: The sensitivity of FDG PET for recurrent HCC was low, with little change in treatment resulting. However, it can predict prognosis in postoperative patients.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-013-0653-3DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fdg pet
16
100 group
12
recurrent hepatocellular
8
hepatocellular carcinoma
8
postoperative patients
8
detection recurrent
8
recurrent hcc
8
imaging group
8
group 100
8
fdg
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!