Is suv corrected for lean body mass superior to suv of body weight in68ga-psma pet/ct? 68 ga psma pet/bt’de yağsız vücut kütlesine göre düzeltilmiş suv vücut ağırlığına göre hesaplanan suv’den daha mı üstün?
Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy, cilt.30, sa.3, ss.144-149, 2021 (ESCI, Scopus, TRDizin)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 30 Sayı: 3
- Basım Tarihi: 2021
- Doi Numarası: 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2021.59254
- Dergi Adı: Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.144-149
- Anahtar Kelimeler: SUV, SUL, lean body mass, prostate specific membrane antigen
- Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between the standard uptake value (SUV) of body weight and SUV corrected for lean body mass (SUL) parameters obtained from the prostate gland in gallium-68 (68Ga)-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) with Gleason grade (GG) groups, D’Amico risk groups, and presence of metastases. Methods: Patients with prostate adenocarcinoma who underwent68Ga-PSMA PET/CT for staging at our center between February 2017 and October 2018 were evaluated retrospectively. Maximum SUV(SUV), SUV, SUL, SUL, SUV, and SUL values of the prostate tumor max peak max peak mean mean were obtained. The difference in these values between GG groups (≥3, <3) and D’Amico risk (low-moderate/high) groups was evaluated with the Mann-Whitney U test. The area under the curve values of SUV and SUL parameters were compared. In addition, SUVmean and SULmean values were obtained from the right liver lobe, and their correlation with body weight was evaluated. Results: A total of 79 patients were included in the study. Significant differences were found in the prostate SUVmax, SULmax, SUVpeak, SULpeak, SUVmean, and SULmean values between the GG (≥3 and <3) groups and between D’Amico risk (low-moderate and high) groups. However, no significant difference was found in the discriminative power of any SUV or SUL parameter when compared with each other. A significant difference in any SUV and SUL parameters was found in patients with and without metastasis. Neither liver SUVmean value nor SULmean value correlated with the body weight. Conclusion: The superiority of SUL values obtained from68Ga-PSMA PET to SUV was not determined in our study. SUV parameters can also be used for quantitative analysis in68Ga-PSMA PET.