Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2006 May;47(5):755-62.

18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting nodal metastases in patients with oral cancer staged N0 by clinical examination and CT/MRI

Affiliations
  • PMID: 16644744
Free article
Clinical Trial

18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting nodal metastases in patients with oral cancer staged N0 by clinical examination and CT/MRI

Heiko Schöder et al. J Nucl Med. 2006 May.
Free article

Abstract

(18)F-FDG PET has a high accuracy in staging head and neck cancer, but its role in patients with clinically and radiographically negative necks (N0) is less clear. In particular, the value of combined PET/CT has not been determined in this group of patients.

Methods: In a prospective study, 31 patients with oral cancer and no evidence of lymph node metastases by clinical examination or CT/MRI underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT before elective neck dissection. PET/CT findings were recorded by neck side (left or right) and lymph node level. PET/CT findings were compared with histopathology of dissected nodes, which was the standard of reference.

Results: Elective neck dissections (26 unilateral, 5 bilateral; a total of 36 neck sides), involving 142 nodal levels, were performed. Only 13 of 765 dissected lymph nodes harbored metastases. Histopathology revealed nodal metastases in 9 of 36 neck sides and 9 of 142 nodal levels. PET was TP in 6 nodal levels (6 neck sides), false-negative in 3 levels (3 neck sides), true-negative in 127 levels (23 neck sides), and false-positive in 6 levels (4 neck sides). The 3 false-negative findings occurred in metastases smaller than 3 mm or because of inability to distinguish between primary tumor and adjacent metastasis. TP and false-positive nodes exhibited similar standardized uptakes (4.8 +/- 1.1 vs. 4.2 +/- 1.0; P = not significant). Sensitivity and specificity were 67% and 85% on the basis of neck sides and 67% and 95% on the basis of number of nodal levels, respectively. If a decision regarding the need for neck dissection had been based solely on PET/CT, 3 false-negative necks would have been undertreated, and 4 false-positive necks would have been overtreated.

Conclusion: (18)F-FDG PET/CT can identify lymph node metastases in a segment of patients with oral cancer and N0 neck. A negative test can exclude metastatic deposits with high specificity. Despite reasonably high overall accuracy, however, the clinical application of PET/CT in the N0 neck may be limited by the combination of limited sensitivity for small metastatic deposits and a relatively high number of false-positive findings. The surgical management of the N0 neck should therefore not be based on PET/CT findings alone.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

Substances