Detection of Metastatic Cervical Lymph Nodes in Recurrent Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma: Computed Tomography Versus Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography

Objective: We sought to determine whether positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is more accurate than CT for detecting metastatic cervical lymph nodes in recurrent papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) and to determine the relationship between the CT features and PET-CT findings of metastatic nodes. Methods: Eleven consecutive patients with recurrent PTC underwent contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) and PET-CT before surgery. We retrospectively evaluated CECT and PET-CT images to determine the presence of metastatic nodes by level-by-level analysis. The CT findings of the PET-CT results that were positive and negative for metastatic nodes were compared. Results: Metastatic nodes were found at 28 (78%) of 36 neck levels surgically explored. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CECT for the detection of metastatic nodes were 75.0%, 87.5%, and 77.8%, respectively, and those of PET-CT were 35.7%, 87.5%, and 48.6%, respectively, by level-by-level analysis. No significant difference in the CT features was found between the PET-CT findings positive and negative for metastatic nodes (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Computed tomography is more sensitive and accurate than PET-CT for detecting metastatic lymph nodes in recurrent PTC. No significant relationship was found between the CT features and the PET-CT findings of the metastatic nodes.Pfannenberg AC, 2007, BRIT J RADIOL, V80, P437, DOI 10.1259/bjr/34082277Jeong HS, 2006, CLIN ENDOCRINOL, V65, P402, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2006.02612.xWang SH, 2006, THYROID, V16, P1Ferris RL, 2005, LARYNGOSCOPE, V115, P1979, DOI 10.1097/01.mlg.0000178328.70288.55Branstetter BF, 2005, RADIOLOGY, V235, P580, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2352040134Nahas Z, 2005, LARYNGOSCOPE, V115, P237, DOI 10.1097/01.mlg.0000154725.00787.00Antoch G, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P4357, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2004.08.120Torlontano M, 2004, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V89, P3402, DOI 10.1210/jc.2003-031521Schoder H, 2004, RADIOLOGY, V231, P65, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2311030271Menzel C, 2004, NUCL MED COMMUN, V25, P239, DOI 10.1097/01.mnm.0000113337.33882.84Bui CD, 2003, INVEST RADIOL, V38, P593, DOI 10.1097/01.RLI.0000077126.42858392Pacini F, 2003, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V88, P3668, DOI 10.1210/jc.2002-021925Yoon YC, 2003, RADIOLOGY, V227, P764, DOI 10.1148/Frasoldati A, 2003, CANCER, V97, P90, DOI 10.1002/cncr.11031GREENE FL, 2002, AJCC CANC STAGING MA, P77Frilling A, 2001, ANN SURG, V234, P804Hooft L, 2001, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V86, P3779Mazzaferri EL, 2001, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V86, P1447Yeo JS, 2001, HEAD NECK-J SCI SPEC, V23, P94SCHLUMBERGER MJ, 2000, BAILLIERE CLIN ENDOC, V14, P610Chung JK, 1999, J NUCL MED, V40, P986Mazzaferri EL, 1999, THYROID, V9, P421Nygaard B, 1998, ACAD RADIOL, V5, P409Myers LL, 1998, LARYNGOSCOPE, V108, P232Schlumberger MJ, 1998, NEW ENGL J MED, V338, P297Dietlein M, 1997, EUR J NUCL MED, V24, P1342Feine U, 1996, J NUCL MED, V37, P1468SOM PM, 1994, AM J NEURORADIOL, V15, P1123JABOUR BA, 1993, RADIOLOGY, V186, P27HAY ID, 1993, SURGERY, V14, P1050SOM PM, 1992, AM J ROENTGENOL, V158, P961VANDENBREKEL MWM, 1990, RADIOLOGY, V177, P379DEGROOT LJ, 1990, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V71, P414MANCUSO AA, 1983, RADIOLOGY, V148, P715*NCCN, THYR CARC CLIN PRACT*EUR SOC UR RAD, ESUR GUID CONTR MED