PDF herunterladen
Radiopraxis 2016; 9(02): 73-90
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-110308
CRTE/CPD – Zertifizierte Fortbildung mit der Radiopraxis
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Diagnostik von Knochenmetastasen mittels neuer bildgebender Verfahren

Diagnosing Bone Metastases with New Imaging Technologies
M. Hübner
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
09. Juni 2016 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
   
Podcast
  Lizenzen und Reprints

Knochenmetastasen sind die häufigsten Tumormanifestationen des Skelettsystems. In Hinblick auf eine optimale Therapieplanung spielt die frühzeitige Diagnostik eine entscheidende Rolle. In der jüngeren Vergangenheit wurden neue Diagnoseverfahren wie die simultane PET/MRT in die Klinik eingeführt. Die ersten Ergebnisse aktueller Studien zeigen ein großes Potenzial der PET/MRT bei der Erkennung ossärer Metastasen. Durch eine Reduktion der Strahlenexposition im Vergleich zum PET/CT zeichnet sich ein Vorteil besonders im Bereich der Tumordiagnostik von Kindern und jungen Erwachsenen ab.

Abstract

Bone metastases are the most common tumor entity of the skeletal system. Because of its effect on the choice of therapeutic regime, early and accurat detection of bone metastases is mandatory. The first combined PET/MRI scanners have been introduced into the clinical environment in the early past. Recent clinical studies have shown a great potential of PET/MRI in the detection of osseous metastases. In particular, the reduction of radiation exposure will have a benefit over PET/CT-examinations, especially in tumor diagnostic of children and young adults.

Kernaussagen

  • Knochenmetastasen sind die häufigsten Tumormanifestationen des Skelettsystems. Für eine optimale Therapieplanung ist die frühzeitige Diagnostik wichtig.

  • Aktuelle Studien zeigen ein großes Potenzial der PET/MRT bei der Erkennung ossärer Metastasen.

  • Die geringere Strahlenexposition der PET/MRT im Vergleich zum PET/CT ist besonders im Bereich der Tumordiagnostik von Kindern und jungen Erwachsenen vorteilhaft

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Uhl M, Herget GW. Radiologische Diagnostik von Knochentumoren. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2008
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Steinborn M, Tiling R, Heuck A et al. Diagnostik der Metastasierung im Knochenmark mittels MRT. Radiologe 2000; 40: 826-834
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 1356-1367
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Rubens RD. Bone metastases -- the clinical problem. Eur J Cancer 1998; 34: 210-213
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Pelosi E, Messa C, Sironi S et al. Value of integrated PET/CT for lesion localisation in cancer patients: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 932-939
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bockisch A, Beyer T, Antoch G et al. Grundlagen und klinischer Nutzen von PET-CT. Radiologe 2004; 44: 1045-1054
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Drzezga A, Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M et al. First clinical experience with integrated whole-body PET/MR: comparison to PET/CT in patients with oncologic diagnoses. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 845-855
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schwenzer NF, Pfannenberg C, Reischl G et al. Einsatz von MR/PET in der onkologischen Bildgebung. Rofo 2012; 184: 780-787
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Antoch G, Bockisch A. Combined PET/MRI: a new dimension in whole-body oncology imaging?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: S113-S120
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Buchbender C, Heusner TA, Lauenstein TC et al. Oncologic PET/MRI, part 2: bone tumors, soft-tissue tumors, melanoma, and lymphoma. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 1244-1252
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Krishnamurthy GT, Tubis M, Hiss J et al. Distribution pattern of metastatic bone disease. A need for total body skeletal image. JAMA 1977; 237: 2504-2506
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Batson OV. The Function of the Vertebral Veins and Their Role in the Spread of Metastases. Ann Surg 1940; 112: 138-149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Choi J, Raghavan M. Diagnostic imaging and image-guided therapy of skeletal metastases. Cancer Control 2012; 19: 102-112
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Bayrak SB, Ceylan E, Serter M et al. The clinical importance of bone metabolic markers in detecting bone metastasis of lung cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2012; 17: 112-118
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA et al. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 2942-2953
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Rybak LD, Rosenthal DI. Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases. Q J Nucl Med 2001; 45: 53-64
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Sarma A, Heilbrun ME, Conner KE et al. Radiation and chest CT scan examinations: what do we know?. Chest 2012; 142: 750-760
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Weishaupt D, Köchli VD, Marincek B, Froehlich JM. Wie funktioniert MRI? . 6. . Aufl. Heidelberg: Springer Medizin; 2009
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Tokuda O, Hayashi N, Matsunaga N. MRI of bone tumors: Fast STIR imaging as a substitute for T1-weighted contrast-enhanced fat-suppressed spin-echo imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 19: 475-481
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Lecouvet FE, Larbi A, Pasoglou V et al. MRI for response assessment in metastatic bone disease. Eur Radiol 2013; 23: 1986-1997
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 2003; 290: 3199-3206
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Yang HL, Liu T, Wang XM et al. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing 18FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 2604-2617
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Schober O, Beyer F. PET-CT Hybrid Imaging. Stuttgart, New York: Thieme; 2010
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Townsend DW, Beyer T, Blodgett TM. PET/CT scanners: a hardware approach to image fusion. Semin Nucl Med 2003; 33: 193-204
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Pichler BJ, Judenhofer MS, Catana C et al. Performance test of an LSO-APD detector in a 7-T MRI scanner for simultaneous PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 639-647
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Martinez-Möller A, Souvatzoglou M, Delso G et al. Tissue classification as a potential approach for attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI: evaluation with PET/CT data. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 520-526
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Akbarzadeh A, Ay MR, Ahmadian A et al. MRI-guided attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MR: assessment of the effect of bone attenuation. Ann Nucl Med 2013; 27: 152-162
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R et al. Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 939-949
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Avery R, Kuo PH. 18F sodium fluoride PET/CT detects osseous metastases from breast cancer missed on FDG PET/CT with marrow rebound. Clin Nucl Med 2013; 38: 746-748
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Stattaus J, Hahn S, Gauler T et al. Osteoblastic response as a healing reaction to chemotherapy mimicking progressive disease in patients with small cell lung cancer. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 193-200
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Beiderwellen K, Huebner M, Heusch P et al. Whole-body [18F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT in the assessment of bone lesions in oncological patients: initial results. Eur Radiol 2014; 24: 2023-2030
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Schweitzer ME, Levine C, Mitchell DG et al. Bull's-eyes and halos: useful MR discriminators of osseous metastases. Radiology 1993; 188: 249-252
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Catalano OA, Nicolai E, Rosen BR et al. Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 2015; 112: 1452-1460
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wehrli FW. Magnetic resonance of calcified tissues. J Magn Reson 2013; 229: 35-48
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G et al. Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 608-613
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Hirsch FW, Sattler B, Sorge I et al. PET/MR in children. Initial clinical experience in paediatric oncology using an integrated PET/MR scanner. Pediatr Radiol 2013; 43: 860-875
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Schaefer JF, Gatidis S, Schmidt H et al. Simultaneous whole-body PET/MR imaging in comparison to PET/CT in pediatric oncology: initial results. Radiology 2014; 273: 220-231
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar