Quantitative vs. Qualitative SPECT-CT Diagnostic Accuracy in Bone Lesion Evaluation—A Review of the Literature.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Abstract:
      (1) Background: Considering the importance that quantitative molecular imaging has gained and the need for objective and reproducible image interpretation, the aim of the present review is to emphasize the benefits of performing a quantitative interpretation of single photon emission computed tomography-computed tomography (SPECT-CT) studies compared to qualitative interpretation methods in bone lesion evaluations while suggesting new directions for research on this topic. (2) Methods: By conducting comprehensive literature research, we performed an analysis of published data regarding the use of quantitative and qualitative SPECT-CT in the evaluation of bone metastases. (3) Results: Several studies have evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative and qualitative SPECT-CT in differentiating between benign and metastatic bone lesions. We collected the sensitivity and specificity for both quantitative and qualitative SPECT-CT; their values ranged between 74–92% and 81–93% for quantitative bone SPECT-CT and between 60–100% and 41–100% for qualitative bone SPECT-CT. (4) Conclusions: Both qualitative and quantitative SPECT-CT present an increased potential for better differentiating between benign and metastatic bone lesions, with the latter offering additional objective information, thus increasing diagnostic accuracy and enabling the possibility of performing treatment response evaluation through accurate measurements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
    • Abstract:
      Copyright of Diagnostics (2075-4418) is the property of MDPI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)