title: Comparison of CT and 18F-FDG pet for detecting peritoneal metastasis on the preoperative evaluation for gastric carcinoma.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of our study was to compare the accuracy of CT and (18)FFDG PET for detecting peritoneal metastasis in patients with gastric carcinoma.
  
  
  METHODS
  One-hundred-twelve patients who underwent a histologic confirmative exam or treatment (laparotomy, n = 107; diagnostic laparoscopy, n = 4; peritoneal washing cytology, n = 1) were retrospectively enrolled. All the patients underwent CT and (18)F-FDG PET scanning for their preoperative evaluation. The sensitivities, specificities and accuracies of CT and (18)FFDG PET imaging for the detection of peritoneal metastasis were calculated and then compared using Fisher's exact probability test (p < 0.05), on the basis of the original preoperative reports. In addition, two board-certified radiologists and two board-certified nuclear medicine physicians independently reviewed the CT and PET scans, respectively. A receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to compare the diagnostic performance of CT and (18)F-FDG PET imaging for detecting peritoneal metastasis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Based on the original preoperative reports, CT and (18)F-FDG PET showed sensitivities of 76.5% and 35.3% (p = 0.037), specificities of 91.6% and 98.9% (p = 0.035), respectively, and equal accuracies of 89.3% (p = 1.0). The receptor operating characteristics curve analysis showed a significantly higher diagnostic performance for CT (Az = 0.878) than for PET (Az = 0.686) (p = 0.004). The interobserver agreement for detecting peritoneal metastasis was good (kappa value = 0.684) for CT and moderate (kappa value = 0.460) for PET.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  For the detection of peritoneal metastasis, CT was more sensitive and showed a higher diagnostic performance than PET, although CT had a relatively lower specificity than did PET.
authors.affiliation: Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seodaemoon-Gu, Seoul, Korea.
authors.forename: Joon Seok
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Lim
authors.forename: Myeong-Jin
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Mi Jin
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Yun
authors.forename: Young Taik
authors.initials: YT
authors.lastname: Oh
authors.forename: Joo Hee
authors.initials: JH
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Hee Sung
authors.initials: HS
authors.lastname: Hwang
authors.forename: Mi-Suk
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Park
authors.forename: Seoung-Whan
authors.initials: SW
authors.lastname: Cha
authors.forename: Jong Doo
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Sung Hoon
authors.initials: SH
authors.lastname: Noh
authors.forename: Hyung Sik
authors.initials: HS
authors.lastname: Yoo
authors.forename: Ki Whang
authors.initials: KW
authors.lastname: Kim
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D003287:Contrast Media; D005260:Female; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D006801:Humans; D007472:Iohexol / Q000031:analogs & derivatives; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010534:Peritoneal Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000556:secondary*; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography; D012372:ROC Curve; D011859:Radiography; D019275:Radiopharmaceuticals; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013274:Stomach Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology*; D014055:Tomography, Emission-Computed
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media; D019275:Radiopharmaceuticals; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D007472:Iohexol; C038192:iopromide