The usefulness of (18)F-FDG PET/MRI fusion image in diagnosing pancreatic tumor: comparison with (18)F-FDG PET/CT

Radiology of pancreatic neoplasms: An update

Diagnostic imaging is an important tool to evaluate pancreatic neoplasms. We describe the imaging features of pancreatic malignancies and their benign mimics. Accurate detection and staging are essential for ensuring appropriate selection of patients who will benefit from surgery and for preventing unnecessary surgeries in patients with unresectable disease. Ultrasound, multidetector computed tomography with multiplanar reconstruction and magnetic resonance imaging can help to do a correct diagnosis. Radiologists should be aware of the wide variety of anatomic variants and pathologic conditions that may mimic pancreatic neoplasms. The knowledge of the most important characteristic key findings may facilitate the right diagnosis.

PET/MRI and PET/CT in follow-up of head and neck cancer patients

PURPOSE

Positron emission tomography (PET)/MRI combines the functional ability of PET and the high soft tissue contrast of MRI. The aim of this study was to assess contrast-enhanced (ce)PET/MRI compared to cePET/CT in patients with suspected recurrence of head and neck cancer (HNC).

METHODS

Eighty-seven patients underwent sequential cePET/CT and cePET/MRI using a trimodality PET/CT-MRI set-up. Diagnostic accuracy for the detection of recurrent HNC was evaluated using cePET/CT and cePET/MRI. Furthermore, image quality, presence of unclear (18)F-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose (FDG) findings of uncertain significance and the diagnostic advantages of use of gadolinium contrast enhancement were analysed.

RESULTS

cePET/MRI showed no statistically significant difference in diagnostic accuracy compared to cePET/CT (91.5 vs 90.6%). Artefacts' grade was similar in both methods, but their location was different. cePET/CT artefacts were primarily located in the suprahyoid area, while on cePET/MRI, artefacts were more equally distributed among the supra and infrahyoid neck regions. cePET/MRI and cePET/CT showed 34 unclear FDG findings; of those 11 could be solved by cePET/MRI and 5 by cePET/CT. The use of gadolinium in PET/MRI did not yield higher diagnostic accuracy, but helped to better define tumour margins in 6.9% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that cePET/MRI may be superior compared to cePET/CT to specify unclear FDG uptake related to possible tumour recurrence in follow-up of patients after HNC. It seems to be the modality of choice for the evaluation of the oropharynx and the oral cavity because of a higher incidence of artefacts in cePET/CT in this area mainly due to dental implants. However, overall there is no statistically significant difference.