Colorectal cancer patients before resection of hepatic metastases

Summary

Aim: Evaluation of the role of FDG-PET in comparison to conventional staging methods for detecting extrahepatic tumour deposits prior to resection of liver metastases. Patients, Methods: In our prospective study, 58 patients (24 women, 34 men; age 33-81 years) with liver metastases of colorectal carcinoma underwent FDG-PET. Images were acquired in 3D-mode including transmission scans and reconstructed iteratively. For conventional staging all patients underwent abdominal ultrasound, helical computed tomography (CT) of the thorax and abdomen, and colonoscopy/rectoscopy. A preliminary therapeutic decision was established without knowledge of the FDG-PET findings. Thereafter, it was revised or confirmed according to the results of FDG-PET. Results: In 3/58 patients extrahepatic tumour deposits were concordantly identified with both conventional staging methods and FDG-PET. However, in one case, both conventional methods and FDG-PET were false positive regarding pulmonary metastases. In 12/58 patients, nothing but FDG-PET detected extrahepatic tumour masses, which were later confirmed either by histology or follow-up. Conclusion: Our study suggests that in 21% of patients exclusively FDG-PET is an appropriate diagnostic tool to reveal extrahepatic metastases or local recurrence of colorectal carcinoma. Our results demonstrate that FDG-PET provides relevant additional information for accurate therapeutic planning as compared to the conventional combination of staging methods. Therefore, FDG-PET has to exert a decisive influence on the decision for resection of hepatic metastases.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel: Bedeutung der FDG-PET zum Nachweis von extra-hepatischem Tumorgewebe vor Lebermetastasenresektion im Vergleich zum konventionellen Staging. Patienten, Methoden: In einer prospektiven Studie wurden 58 Patienten (24 Frauen, 34 Männer; Lebens-alter: 33-81 Jahre) mit Lebermetastasen eines Kolonoder Rektumkarzinoms untersucht. Die Ganzkörper-FDGPET erfolgte einschließlich Transmissionsmessung im 3D-Modus, die Rekonstruktion iterativ mit Schwächungskorrektur. Die Patienten erhielten zusätzlich im Rahmen der konventionellen Diagnostik Oberbauchsonographie, Spiral-Computertomographie und Rekto-/Koloskopie. Die Befundung der konventionellen Diagnostik und der PETUntersuchung erfolgte unabhängig voneinander. Basie-rend auf konventioneller Diagnostik wurde ohne Kenntnis des PET-Befundes eine vorläufige Entscheidung zur Resektion getroffen. Diese wurde je nach PET-Befund bestätigt oder geändert. Ergebnisse: Bei 3/58 Patienten wurde konventionell und mit FDG-PET übereinstimmend eine extrahepatische Metastasierung diagnostiziert. In einem Fall lieferten beide Verfahren falsch positive Ergebnisse hinsichtlich Lungenmetastasierung. Bei 12/58 Patienten wurde nur dank der FDG-PET-Untersuchung eine extrahepatische Metastasierung bzw. ein Lokalrezidiv histologisch gesichert oder im Verlauf nachgewiesen. Schlussfolgerung: Unsere Studie zeigt, dass bei 21% der Patienten ausschließlich die FDG-PET extra-hepatische Metastasen oder ein Lokalrezidiv bei kolorektalen Karzinomen nachweist. Im Vergleich zum konventionellen Staging liefert die FDG-PET relevante Zusatzinformationen und beeinflusst die Entscheidung zur Resektion von Lebermetastasen maßgeblich.

Keywords

PET - FDG - colorectal cancer - hepatic metastases - extrahepatic disease

Schlüsselwörter

PET - FDG - Kolonkarzinom - Lebermetastasen - Lokalrezidiv

• References

• 1 Beets G, Penninckx F, Schiepers C. et al. Clinical value of whole-body positron emission tomography with ¹⁸F fluorodeoxyglucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 1666-70.
• 2 Bolton JS, Fuhrman GM. Survival after resection of multiple bilobar hepatic metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Ann Surg 2000; 231: 743-51.
• 3 Delbeke D, Patton JA, Martin WH. et al. FDG PET and dual-head gamma camera positron coincidence detection imaging of suspected malignancies and brain disorders. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 110-7.
• 4 Dietlein M, Weber W, Schwaiger M. et al. ¹⁸FFluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in restaging of colorectal cancer. Nuklearmedizin 2003; 42: 145-56.
• 5 Flamen P, Stroobants S, van Cutsen E. et al. Additional value of whole-body positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxyD-glucose in recurrent colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 894-901.
• 6 Fong Y, Cohen AM, Fortner JG. et al. Liver re-section for colorectal metastases. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 938-46.
• 7 Fong Y, Saldinger PF, Akhurst T. et al. Utility of ¹⁸F-FDG positron emission tomography scanning on selection of patients for resection of hepatic colorectal metastases. Am J Surg 1999; 178: 282-7.
• 8 Fortner JG, Silva JS, Golbey RB. et al. Multivariate analysis of a personal series of 247 consecutive patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer. I. Treatment by hepatic re-section. Ann Surg 1984; 199: 306-16.
• 9 Gayowski TJ, Iwatsuki S, Madariaga JR. et al. Experience in hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of clinical and pathologic risk factors. Surgery 1994; 116: 703-10 discussion 710-1.
• 10 Greenway B. Hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: resection or not. Br J Surg 1988; 75: 513-9.
• 11 Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE. et al. A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med 2000; 41: 1177-89.
• 12 Imdahl A, Reinhardt MJ, Nitzsche EU. et al. Impact of ¹⁸F-FDG-positron emission tomography for decision making in colorectal cancer recurrences. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 2000; 385: 129-34.
• 13 Lai DT, Fulham M, Stephen MS. et al. The role of whole-body positron emission tomography with [¹⁸F]fluorodeoxyglucose in identifying operable colorectal cancer metastases to the liver. Arch Surg 1996; 131: 703-7.
• 14 Meta J, Seltzer M, Schiepers C. et al. Impact of ¹⁸F-FDG PET on managing patients with colorectal cancer: the referring physician’s perspective. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 586-90.
• 15 Minagawa M, Makuuchi M, Torzilli G. et al. Extension of the frontiers of surgical indications in the treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: long-term results. Ann Surg 2000; 231: 487-99.
• 16 Ogunbiyi OA, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F. et al. Detection of recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer: comparison of positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Ann Surg Oncol 1997; 4: 613-20.
• 17 Robinson BJ, Rice TW, Strong SA. et al. Is re-section of pulmonary and hepatic metastases warranted in patients with colorectal cancer?. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 117: 66-75 discussion 75-66.
• 18 Ruers TJ, Langenhoff BS, Neeleman N. et al. Value of positron emission tomography with ¹⁸F fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 388-95.
• 19 Scheele J, Stangl R, Altendorf-Hofmann A. Hepatic metastases from colorectal carcinoma: impact of surgical resection on the natural history. Br J Surg 1990; 77: 1241-6.
• 20 Steele Jr G, Ravikumar TS. Resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Biologic perspective. Ann Surg 1989; 210: 127-38.
• 21 Strauss LG. Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose and false-positive Results: a major problem in the diagnostics of oncological patients. Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 1409-15.
• 22 Sugarbaker PH. Surgical decision making for large bowel cancer metastatic to the liver. Radiology 1990; 174: 621-6.
• 23 Valk PE, Abella-Columna E, Haseman MK. et al. Whole-body PET imaging with ¹⁸F fluorodeoxyglucose in management of recurrent colorectal cancer. Arch Surg 1999; 134: 503-11.
• 24 Vauthey JN. Liver imaging. A surgeon’s perspective. Radiol Clin North Am 1998; 36: 445-57.
• 25 Vitola J, Delbeke D. Positron emission tomography for evaluation of colorectal carcinoma. Semin Roentgenol 2002; 37: 118-28.