Imaging methods ERUS CT NMR FGD-PET scan Radioimmunoscintigraphy Bone scintigraphy Most types of local recurrence even from beginning extraluminal ! Follow-up
Sensitivity of different imaging methods for the detection of the liver metastases Screen ing techni que No of patient s Patient s with liver met. Positiv e result (n) True positiv e (n) Negati ve result (n) True negati ve (n) Sensitiv ity (95% CI) Specifi city (95% CI) CT ,670,91 MR ,640,91 US ,430,96 C. Glover, DCR 2002.
CT vs NMR imaging Follow-up
CT vs NMR imaging Follow-up
Sensitivity and specificity of combinaton of different imaging methods for the detection of the liver metastases C. Glover, DCR *DPI ultrasound Doppler assessment of hepatic arterial and portal venous blood flow *HPI isotope assessment of hepatic arterial and portal venous blood flow
FDG-PET scan- local recurrence of RC Schiepers C. Eur J Surg Oncol FDG-PET scan- successful in distinguishing tumor from scar tissue Evidence of LR Follow-up
CT vs. FDG-PET scan specificity (%)sensitivity (%) FDG-PET scan9892 CT6072 Schiepers C. Eur J Surg Oncol Follow-up Local recurrence of RC
Indications for FDG-PET scan Patients planned for curative salvage surgery Patients with inconclusive or conflicting results from conventional imaging methods Patients with all conventional tests negative and elevated CEA levels
Diagnostic tests Summary Combination of tests has higher sensitivity and specificity than any individual test There's no sufficient data to recommend optimal combination of tests and frequency of follow-up visits Follow-up