Imaging of neuroendocrine tumors: Accuracy of helical CT versus SRS

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: We retrospectively compared the accuracy of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with that of helical computed tomography (CT) in the detection and localization of primary and metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Methods: A medical record search identified 27 patients with known or clinically suspected neuroendocrine tumors who underwent helical CT and SRS within 3 months of one another at our institution. CT images were evaluated retrospectively by two blinded radiologists who used consensus reading. Images were evaluated for the presence or absence of primary tumor and hepatic and extrahepatic metastases. CT results were compared with the SRS report as interpreted by the nuclear medicine physicians. The results of the surgical, clinical follow-up, and pathologic findings were considered as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for both imaging techniques. In addition, McNemar analysis was performed to determine statistically significant differences between CT and SRS. Results: Helical CT was more sensitive than SRS in the detection of extrahepatic metastases, and the difference between the two imaging modalities was statistically significant (p = 0.0312) as determined by the McNemar chi-square test. However, the difference between CT and SRS in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumors, hepatic metastasis, and combined hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis was not statistically significant (p = 0.625, 1.000, and 1.000, respectively). Conclusion: Helical CT and SRS have similar sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumor and hepatic metastasis. However, helical CT appears to be more sensitive in detecting extrahepatic metastasis from primary neuroendocrine tumors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)696-702
Number of pages7
JournalAbdominal Imaging
Volume29
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2004

Fingerprint

Somatostatin Receptors
Neuroendocrine Tumors
Spiral Computed Tomography
Radionuclide Imaging
Neoplasm Metastasis
Tomography
Liver
Sensitivity and Specificity
Nuclear Medicine
Chi-Square Distribution
Medical Records
Reading
Physicians

Keywords

  • Helical computed tomography
  • Neuroendocrine tumors
  • Scintigraphy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology
  • Urology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Imaging of neuroendocrine tumors : Accuracy of helical CT versus SRS. / Kumbasar, B.; Kamel, Ihab R; Tekes, Aylin; Eng, John; Fishman, Elliot K; Wahl, R. L.

In: Abdominal Imaging, Vol. 29, No. 6, 11.2004, p. 696-702.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0daf49604e8d48ff9546a8d33edbe8aa,
title = "Imaging of neuroendocrine tumors: Accuracy of helical CT versus SRS",
abstract = "Background: We retrospectively compared the accuracy of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with that of helical computed tomography (CT) in the detection and localization of primary and metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Methods: A medical record search identified 27 patients with known or clinically suspected neuroendocrine tumors who underwent helical CT and SRS within 3 months of one another at our institution. CT images were evaluated retrospectively by two blinded radiologists who used consensus reading. Images were evaluated for the presence or absence of primary tumor and hepatic and extrahepatic metastases. CT results were compared with the SRS report as interpreted by the nuclear medicine physicians. The results of the surgical, clinical follow-up, and pathologic findings were considered as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for both imaging techniques. In addition, McNemar analysis was performed to determine statistically significant differences between CT and SRS. Results: Helical CT was more sensitive than SRS in the detection of extrahepatic metastases, and the difference between the two imaging modalities was statistically significant (p = 0.0312) as determined by the McNemar chi-square test. However, the difference between CT and SRS in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumors, hepatic metastasis, and combined hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis was not statistically significant (p = 0.625, 1.000, and 1.000, respectively). Conclusion: Helical CT and SRS have similar sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumor and hepatic metastasis. However, helical CT appears to be more sensitive in detecting extrahepatic metastasis from primary neuroendocrine tumors.",
keywords = "Helical computed tomography, Neuroendocrine tumors, Scintigraphy",
author = "B. Kumbasar and Kamel, {Ihab R} and Aylin Tekes and John Eng and Fishman, {Elliot K} and Wahl, {R. L.}",
year = "2004",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1007/s00261-003-0162-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "696--702",
journal = "Abdominal Imaging",
issn = "0942-8925",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Imaging of neuroendocrine tumors

T2 - Accuracy of helical CT versus SRS

AU - Kumbasar, B.

AU - Kamel, Ihab R

AU - Tekes, Aylin

AU - Eng, John

AU - Fishman, Elliot K

AU - Wahl, R. L.

PY - 2004/11

Y1 - 2004/11

N2 - Background: We retrospectively compared the accuracy of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with that of helical computed tomography (CT) in the detection and localization of primary and metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Methods: A medical record search identified 27 patients with known or clinically suspected neuroendocrine tumors who underwent helical CT and SRS within 3 months of one another at our institution. CT images were evaluated retrospectively by two blinded radiologists who used consensus reading. Images were evaluated for the presence or absence of primary tumor and hepatic and extrahepatic metastases. CT results were compared with the SRS report as interpreted by the nuclear medicine physicians. The results of the surgical, clinical follow-up, and pathologic findings were considered as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for both imaging techniques. In addition, McNemar analysis was performed to determine statistically significant differences between CT and SRS. Results: Helical CT was more sensitive than SRS in the detection of extrahepatic metastases, and the difference between the two imaging modalities was statistically significant (p = 0.0312) as determined by the McNemar chi-square test. However, the difference between CT and SRS in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumors, hepatic metastasis, and combined hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis was not statistically significant (p = 0.625, 1.000, and 1.000, respectively). Conclusion: Helical CT and SRS have similar sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumor and hepatic metastasis. However, helical CT appears to be more sensitive in detecting extrahepatic metastasis from primary neuroendocrine tumors.

AB - Background: We retrospectively compared the accuracy of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) with that of helical computed tomography (CT) in the detection and localization of primary and metastatic neuroendocrine tumors. Methods: A medical record search identified 27 patients with known or clinically suspected neuroendocrine tumors who underwent helical CT and SRS within 3 months of one another at our institution. CT images were evaluated retrospectively by two blinded radiologists who used consensus reading. Images were evaluated for the presence or absence of primary tumor and hepatic and extrahepatic metastases. CT results were compared with the SRS report as interpreted by the nuclear medicine physicians. The results of the surgical, clinical follow-up, and pathologic findings were considered as the gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for both imaging techniques. In addition, McNemar analysis was performed to determine statistically significant differences between CT and SRS. Results: Helical CT was more sensitive than SRS in the detection of extrahepatic metastases, and the difference between the two imaging modalities was statistically significant (p = 0.0312) as determined by the McNemar chi-square test. However, the difference between CT and SRS in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumors, hepatic metastasis, and combined hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis was not statistically significant (p = 0.625, 1.000, and 1.000, respectively). Conclusion: Helical CT and SRS have similar sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in detecting primary neuroendocrine tumor and hepatic metastasis. However, helical CT appears to be more sensitive in detecting extrahepatic metastasis from primary neuroendocrine tumors.

KW - Helical computed tomography

KW - Neuroendocrine tumors

KW - Scintigraphy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4944256634&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4944256634&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00261-003-0162-3

DO - 10.1007/s00261-003-0162-3

M3 - Article

C2 - 15162235

AN - SCOPUS:4944256634

VL - 29

SP - 696

EP - 702

JO - Abdominal Imaging

JF - Abdominal Imaging

SN - 0942-8925

IS - 6

ER -