J Cancer 2020; 11(13):3745-3750. doi:10.7150/jca.44512 This issue

Research Paper

Delayed post-diuretic 18F-FDG PET/CT for preoperative evaluation of renal pelvic cancer

Yiping Shi*, Ruohua Chen*, Yining Wang, Gan Huang, Qian Xia, Jianjun Liu

Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
*These authors contributed equally to this work.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions.
Shi Y, Chen R, Wang Y, Huang G, Xia Q, Liu J. Delayed post-diuretic 18F-FDG PET/CT for preoperative evaluation of renal pelvic cancer. J Cancer 2020; 11(13):3745-3750. doi:10.7150/jca.44512. Available from https://www.jcancer.org/v11p3745.htm

File import instruction


Background: Application of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) in urological oncology was relatively slowly due to the urinary elimination of 18F-FDG. We investigated whether delayed post-diuretic 18F-FDG PET/CT could be used for diagnosing renal pelvic cancer.

Methods: 51 patients were included who underwent delayed post-diuretic 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting renal pelvic space-occupying lesions. The comparations of delayed PET/CT parameters and clinical characteristics between renal pelvic cancer and benign polyp were investigated.

Results: Among the 51 patients, 47 were found to have renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma, and 4 had benign polyp. ROC analysis identified the lesion maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of 6.2 as the optimal cut-off value to distinguish from renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma to benign polyp. With the SUVmax cut-off of 6.2, the sensitivity, and specificity for predicting of renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma were 91.5% (43/47), and 100% (4/4). We also found a significant difference in tumor size between the positive (SUVmax > 6.2) and negative (SUVmax ≤ 6.2) PET groups in renal pelvic cancers. In patients with tumor size < 1.1 cm, the probability of being in the negative PET group was 75%. In such patients, a substantial proportion of renal pelvic cancer demonstrated negative SUVmax similar to that in patients with benign polyp.

Conclusion: Delayed 18F-FDG PET/CT could be used for differentiating renal pelvic cancer from benign polyp. In patients with small tumor size, renal pelvic cancer may present low 18F-FDG uptake, mimicking the metabolic phenotypes of patients with benign polyp.

Keywords: PET/CT, renal pelvic cancer, SUVmax