title: PET/CT versus conventional CT for detection of lymph node metastases in patients with locally advanced bladder cancer.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  We studied patients treated with radical cystectomy for locally advanced bladder cancer to compare the results of both preoperative positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and conventional CT with the findings of postoperative histopathological evaluation of lymph nodes.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients who had bladder cancer and were candidates for cystectomy underwent preoperative PET/CT using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) and conventional CT. The results regarding lymph node involvement were independently evaluated by two experienced radiologists and were subsequently compared with histopathology results, the latter of which were reassessed by an experienced uropathologist (HO).
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were 54 evaluable patients (mean age 68 years, 47 [85%] males and 7 [15%] females) with pT and pN status as follows: < pT2-14 (26%), pT2-10 (18%), and > pT2-30 (56%); pN0 37 (69%) and pN+ 17 (31%). PET/CT showed positive lymph nodes in 12 patients (22%), and 7 of those cases were confirmed by histopathology; the corresponding results for conventional CT were 11 (20%) and 7 patients (13%), respectively. PET/CT had 41% sensitivity, 86% specificity, 58% PPV, and 76% NPV, whereas the corresponding figures for conventional CT were 41%, 89%, 64%, and 77%. Additional analyses of the right and left side of the body or in specified anatomical regions gave similar results.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this study, PET/CT and conventional CT had similar low sensitivity in detecting and localizing regional lymph node metastasis in bladder cancer.
authors: Department of Urology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden. Firas.Abdul-Sattar.Aljabery@regionostergotland.se.|Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. Firas.Abdul-Sattar.Aljabery@regionostergotland.se.
authors: Firas
authors: F
authors: Aljabery
authors: Department of Radiology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden. Gunnar.Lindblom@regionostergotland.se.
authors: Gunnar
authors: G
authors: Lindblom
authors: Department of Radiology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden. Susann.Skoog@regionostergotland.se.
authors: Susann
authors: S
authors: Skoog
authors: Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. ivan.shabo@ki.se.
authors: Ivan
authors: I
authors: Shabo
authors: Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. hansolsson33@telia.com.
authors: Hans
authors: H
authors: Olsson
authors: Regional Cancer Center Southeast Sweden, County Council of Östergötland, Linköping, Sweden. Johan.Rosell@regionostergotland.se.
authors: Johan
authors: J
authors: Rosell
authors: Department of Urology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden. Staffan.Jahnson@glocalnet.net.|Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. Staffan.Jahnson@glocalnet.net.
authors: Staffan
authors: S
authors: Jahnson
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008198:Lymph Nodes / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008207:Lymphatic Metastasis; D008297:Male; D064847:Multimodal Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography / Q000379:methods*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*; D001749:Urinary Bladder Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*