Open AccessRole of Positron Emission Tomography with 2-Deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose Integrated with Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Hepatic Metabolic Activity due to Steatosis in Lymphoma Patients and its Impact on Deauville Score
Author(s) -
Marwa Adel,
Ashraf Fawzy,
Jehan Ahmed Younes,
Shiamaa ElRasad
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
open access macedonian journal of medical sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.288
H-Index - 17
ISSN - 1857-9655
DOI - 10.3889/oamjms.2021.7048
Subject(s) - medicine , steatosis , positron emission tomography , standardized uptake value , hounsfield scale , nuclear medicine , lymphoma , radiology , prospective cohort study , pet ct , positron emission , computed tomography
BACKGROUND: Liver uptake of 2-Deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose integrated (18F-FDG) is taken as the reference tissue in interpretation of Deauville score (DS), which is considered a response assessment.AIM: This study was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of hepatic steatosis in patients with lymphoma and the impact of hepatic metabolic activity due to steatosis on 18F-FDG liver uptake and its effect on DS.MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study was conducted on 77 cases. Seventy-seven patients had baseline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), 69 patients had interim PET/CT, 31 patients had end of treatment (EOT) PET/CT, and 3 patients had follow-up (FU) PET/CT after EOT. The study included 49 female patients (63.6%) and 28 male patients (36.4%). The mean age = 39.5 + 13. Forty-one patients (53.2%) diagnosed as non-Hodgkin lymphoma [HL] while 36 patients (46.8%) diagnosed as HL. Steatosis was diagnosed on the unenhanced CT part of PET/CT examinations using a cutoff value of 42 Hounsfield units. Both maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) and SULmax were recorded on the liver and the tumor target lesion. DS was then computed.RESULTS: Among 77 cases, prevalence of steatosis in baseline (10/77, 12.9%), interim (13/69, 18.8%), and EOT/FU (4/31, 12.9%), there was no significant difference in hepatic steatosis during their time course of their treatment. There was correlation between Liver SUVmax with body mass index (BMI) in each of interim and EOT PET/CT. Regarding SULmax, there was no correlation with BMI. There was no change in interpretation of DS using either SUVmax or SULmax.CONCLUSION: Steatosis has no practical issue regarding liver metabolic activity (either SUVmax or SULmax) in interpretation of DS. Liver SUVmax is affected by body weight. Unlike, SULmax is not affected by body weight.