Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The usefulness of F-18 FDG PET/CT-mammography for preoperative staging of breast cancer: comparison with conventional PET/CT and MR-mammography Cover

The usefulness of F-18 FDG PET/CT-mammography for preoperative staging of breast cancer: comparison with conventional PET/CT and MR-mammography

Radiology and Oncology
Volume 47 (2013): Issue 4 (December 2013)
By: ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Oct 2013
References

References

  1. 1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Smigal C, et al. Cancer statistics, 2006.2006;106-30.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  2. 2. Kopans DB. The positive predictive value of mammography.1992;521-6.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  3. 3. Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC. Analysis of cancer missed at screening mammography.1992;613-7.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  4. 4. Adriaenssens N, Belsack D, Buyl R, Ruggiero L, Breucq C, De Mey J, Lievens P, Lamote J. Ultrasound elastography as an objective diagnostic measurement tool for lymphoedema of the treated breast in breast cancer patients following breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy.2012;284-95.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  5. 5. Zebic-Sinkovec M, Hertl K, Kadivec M, Cavlek M, Podobnik G, Snoj M. Outcome of MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy - initial experience at Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Slovenia.2012;97-105.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  6. 6. Agnese DM. Advances in breast imaging.2005;51-6.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. 7. Scheidhauer K, Walter C, Seemann MD. FDG PET and other imaging modalities in the primary diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions.2004;70-9.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  8. 8. Thurlimann B, Muller A, Senn HJ. Management of primary breast cancer: an update.2004;175-9.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. 9. Rausch DR, Hendrick RE. How to optimize clinical breast MR imaging practices and techniques on your 1.5-T system.2006;1469-84.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. 10. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer.2004;830-49.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  11. 11. Winnekendonk G, Krug B, Warm M, Gohring UJ, Mallmann P, Lackner K. Diagnostic value of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast.2004;688-93.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. 12. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, Nazaradeh F, Goehde SC, Barkhausen J, et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CTand whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology2003;3199-206.
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. 13. Czernin J, Allen-Auerbach M, Schelbert HR. Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: literature-based evidence as of September 2006.2007;78S-88S.
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. 14. Blodgett TM, Meltzer CC, Townsend DW. PET/CT: form and function.2007;360-85.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  15. 15. Zangheri B, Messa C, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Landoni C, Fazio F. PET/CT and breast cancer.2004;135S-142S.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  16. 16. Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Mourtzikos KA, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Initial experience with FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of breast cancer.2006;254-62.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  17. 17. Hodolic M. Role of F-18-choline PET/CT in evaluation of patients with prostate carcinoma.2011;17-21.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  18. 18. Kim JS, Jeong YJ, Sohn MH, Jeong HJ, Lim ST, Kim DW, et al. Usefulness of F-18 FDG PET/CT in subcutaneous panniculitis-like T cell lymphoma: disease extent and treatment response evaluation.2012;279-83.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  19. 19. Radan L, Ben-Haim S, Bar-Shalom R, Guralnik L, Israel O. The role of FDG-PET/CT in suspected recurrence of breast cancer.2006;2545-51.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  20. 20. Beresford M, Lyburn I, Sanghera B, Makris A, Wong WL. Serial integrated 18F-fluorodeoxythymidine PET/CT monitoring neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic response in invasive ductal carcinoma.2007;424-5.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  21. 21. Li D, Chen JH, Wang J, Ling R, Yao Q, Wang L. Value of fused F-18 FDG PET/ CT images in predicting efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast cancer. [in Chinese].2007;900-4.
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. 22. Reddy DH, Mendelson EB. Incorporating new imaging models in breast cancer management.2005;135-45.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  23. 23. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrastenhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach.1999;881-8.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  24. 24. Heusner TA, Freudenberg LS, Kuehl H, Hauth AM, Haibach PV, Forsting M, et al. Whole-body PET/CT-mammography for staging breast cancer: initial results.2008;743-8.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. 25. Ko BS, Noh WC, Kang SS, Park BW, Kang EY, Paik NS, et al. Changing patterns in the clinical characteristics of Korean breast cancer from 1996-2010 using an online nationwide breast cancer database.2012;: 393-400.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  26. 26. Andersson I. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: mammographic screening trial.1998;943-8.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  27. 27. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, Thickman D, Hylton N, Warner E, et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.2005;1898-905.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  28. 28. Friedrich M. MRI of the breast: state of the art.1998;707-25.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  29. 29. Bedrosian I, Mick R, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Reynolds C, Spitz F, et al. Changes in the surgical management of patients with breast carcinoma based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging.2003;468-73.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  30. 30. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for detection, diagnosis and staging of breast cancer.2001;3-30.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. 31. Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E, Colpaert C, Schelfhout AM, Leyman P, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment.2004;501-7.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  32. 32. Hollingsworth AB, Stough RG, O’Dell CA, Brekke CE. Breast magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative locoregional staging.2008;389-97.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  33. 33. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, Kaplan JB, LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value.2002;171-8.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  34. 34. Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Umutlu L, Koeninger A, Freudenberg LS, Hauth AM, et al. Breast cancer staging in a single session: whole-body PET/CT mammography.2008;1215-22.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  35. 35. Samson DJ, Flamm CR, Pisano ED, Aronson N. Should FDG PET be used to decide whether a patient with an abnormal mammogram or breast finding at physical examination should undergo biopsy?2002;773-83.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2013-0031 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 390 - 397
Published on: Oct 8, 2013
Published by: Association of Radiology and Oncology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
breast cancer,
fluorodeoxyglucose,
positron emission tomography,
MRI,
mammography
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Clinical medicine,
Radiology

© 2013 Eun-Ha Moon, Seok Tae Lim, Yeon-Hee Han, Young Jin Jeong, Yun-Hee Kang, Hwan-Jeong Jeong, Myung-Hee Sohn, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Volume 47 (2013): Issue 4 (December 2013)
Previous article
Next article