...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Oncology >Value of peptide receptor scintigraphy using (123)I-vasoactive intestinal peptide and (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe1-octreotide in 194 carcinoid patients: Vienna University Experience, 1993 to 1998.
【24h】

Value of peptide receptor scintigraphy using (123)I-vasoactive intestinal peptide and (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe1-octreotide in 194 carcinoid patients: Vienna University Experience, 1993 to 1998.

机译:使用(123)I-血管活性肠肽和(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe1-奥曲肽对194名类癌患者进行肽受体闪烁显像的价值:维也纳大学体验,1993年至1998年。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

PURPOSE: To report our experience with both (123)I-vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) and (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-octreotide for imaging to identify primary and metastatic tumor sites in carcinoid patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred ninety-four patients with a verified or clinically suspected diagnosis of a carcinoid tumor were injected with (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT for imaging purposes, while 133 patients underwent scanning with both (123)I-VIP and (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT in random order. Imaging results were compared with computed tomography scans, results of conventional ultrasound, endosonography, and endoscopy, and results of surgical exploration in case of inconclusive conventional imaging. RESULTS: Primary or recurrent carcinoid tumors could be visualized with (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT in 95 (91%) of 104 patients; metastatic sites were identified in 110 (95%) of 116 patients. In 11 (51%) of 21 patients with suggestive symptoms but without identified lesions by conventional imaging, focal tracer uptake located the carcinoid tumor. In addition, metastatic disease was demonstrated in three patients after resection. In a direct comparison in the 133 patients who underwent both imaging modalities, (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT was found to be superior to (123)I-VIP, with 35 (93%) of 38 versus 32 (82%) of 38 scans being positive in primary or recurrent tumors, 58 (90%) of 65 versus 53 (82%) of 65 being positive in patients with metastatic sites, and seven (44%) of 16 versus four (25%) of 16 being positive in patients with symptoms but otherwise negative work-ups. Overall, additional lesions not seen on conventional imaging were imaged in 43 (41%) of 158 versus 25 (25%) of 103 scans with (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT and (123)I-VIP, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both peptide tracers have a high sensitivity for localizing tumor sites in patients with ascertained or suspected carcinoid tumors, with (111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT scintigraphy being more sensitive than (123)I-VIP receptor scanning. Both, however, had a higher diagnostic yield than conventional imaging, as verified by surgical intervention or long-term follow-up. The combination of both peptide receptor scans does not seem to further enhance diagnostic information.
机译:目的:报告我们在(123)I-血管活性肠肽(VIP)和(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-奥曲肽方面的经验,以进行成像以识别类癌患者的原发性和转移性肿瘤部位。患者和方法:向(194)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT(影像学)确诊或临床怀疑诊断为类癌的194例患者进行成像,同时对133例患者均进行了扫描(123)I-VIP和(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT以随机顺序排列。将影像学结果与计算机断层扫描,常规超声,内镜检查和内窥镜检查结果进行比较,并在常规影像学尚无定论的情况下进行手术探查。结果:104例患者中有95例(91%)可通过(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT观察原发性或复发性类癌;在116名患者中的110名(95%)中发现了转移部位。在21例提示性症状但传统影像学未发现病灶的患者中,有11例(51%)中,局部示踪剂摄取位于类癌肿瘤中。另外,在切除后的三名患者中发现转移性疾病。在直接比较这两种成像方式的133例患者中,发现(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT优于(123)I-VIP,其中38(35)(93%)相比,原发性或复发性肿瘤中38例扫描中的32例(82%)阳性,转移部位患者中65例中58例(90%)对65例中53例(82%)阳性,16例中的7例(44%)对4例(16%)(25%)在有症状的患者中呈阳性,但其他检查阴性。总体而言,使用(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT和(123)I- VIP。结论:两种肽示踪剂对确定或疑似类癌患者的肿瘤部位均具有很高的敏感性,(111)In-DTPA-D-Phe(1)-OCT闪烁显像比(123)I-VIP受体更敏感扫描。然而,通过手术干预或长期随访证实,两者的诊断率均高于常规成像。两种肽受体扫描的组合似乎并未进一步增强诊断信息。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号