Indian Journal of Urology Users online:3564  
IJU
Home Current Issue Ahead of print Editorial Board Archives Symposia Guidelines Subscriptions Login 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 37  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 125-132

Role of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of renal cell carcinoma


1 Department of Urology and Renal Transplant, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Urology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarkhand, India

Correspondence Address:
Aneesh Srivastava
Department of Urology and Renal Transplant, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/iju.IJU_268_20

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Positron emission tomography (PET) is not a standard recommendation in most of the major guidelines for the evaluation of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Earlier studies evaluating PET scan in patients with RCC have provided discordant results. However, with the advent of newer hybrid PET/computed tomography (CT) scanning systems, this modality has shown increased efficacy in the evaluation of primary renal masses along with the detection of extrarenal metastases, restaging recurrent RCC, and also in monitoring response to targeted therapy. We performed a systematic review of the existing literature on the role of PET scan in the evaluation of RCC. Methodology: We systematically searched the databases of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar to identify studies on the use of PET scan in RCC. Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines, 94 full-text articles were selected, of which 54 relevant articles were then reviewed, after a consensus by the authors. Results: Several studies have shown similar sensitivity and specificity of fluoro-2-deoxy-2-d-glucose-PET (FDG-PET) scan as compared to conventional CT scan for the initial diagnosis of RCC, and an improved sensitivity and specificity for the detection of metastases and recurrences following curative therapy. The PET scan may also play a role in predicting the initial tumor biology and pathology and predicting the prognosis as well as the response to therapy. Conclusion: The current guidelines do not recommend PET scan in the staging armamentarium of RCCs. However, FDG-PET scan is as efficacious, if not better than conventional imaging alone, in the evaluation of the primary and metastatic RCC, as well as in evaluating the response to therapy, due to its ability to pick up areas of increased metabolic activity early on. Newer tracers such as Ga68 prostate specific membrane antigen-labeled ligands may help in opening up newer avenues of theragnostics.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1064    
    Printed16    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded136    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal