Search

PurposeThe aim of this study was to retrospectively compare F-18-FDOPA versus Ga-68-DOTATOC PET in lesion detection rates and laboratory tumor markers in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). Patients and MethodsAll patients with histologically proven NEN between May 2015 and February 2019 were included who underwent both F-18-DOPA and Ga-68-DOTATOC PET scans within 6 months from each other (mean, 75; median, 38; range, 2-168 days). All patients, except those with pancreatic NEN, received carbidopa before F-18-DOPA PET. Based on the number of lesions on both modalities, patients were divided into 3 categories: more lesions on F-18-DOPA (DOPA > DOTA), more lesions on Ga-68-DOTATOC (DOTA > DOPA), and equal number of lesions (DOPA = DOTA). Tumor markers chromogranin A, serotonin, and 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) within a maximum of 3 months around either scan were retrieved from the patients' charts. ResultsF-18-DOPA revealed significantly more lesions compared with Ga-68-DOTATOC (611 vs 385, P DOTA group with 16 small intestinal (SI) NENs, 3 large intestinal, 4 pancreatic, and 1 tumor of unknown origin (TUO). For the 9 patients in the DOTA > DOPA group, 4 were SI, 2 pancreatic, 1 lung, and 2 TUOs. Twelve patients in the DOPA = DOTA group had 6 pancreatic tumors, 3 SI, 1 ovarian, and 2 TUOs. Only serotonin and 5-HIAA showed significant higher values for DOPA > DOTA compared with DOTA > DOPA (mean 24 vs 4, P DOTA patients. ConclusionsThere is an advantage of carbidopa pretreated F-18-DOPA over Ga-68-DOTATOC PET, especially for large intestinal NENs with high levels of biomarkers. There seems to be a relationship between increased biomarker value and improved lesion detection rates with the F-18-DOPA PET scan, which requires further prospective analysis.

In treatment of neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs), confirmation of somatostatin receptor expression withSeven patients with in total 89 lesions completed four infusions of 7.4 GBq [Response to PRRT with [

Background The initial treatment of patients with acute limb ischemia (ALI) remains undefined. The aim of this article was to compare the safety and effectiveness of catheter-driven thrombolysis (CDT) with surgical revascularization and evaluate the various fibrinolytic agents, endovascular, and pharmacochemical approaches that aim for thrombectomy. Methods PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies on the management of ALI by means of surgical or endovascular recanalization, returning 520 studies. All randomized, controlled trials, nonrandomized prospective, and retrospective studies were included comparing treatment of ALI. Results Twenty-five studies, investigating a total of 4689 patients, were included for meta-analysis spread across nine different comparisons. No differences were found in limb salvage between thrombectomy and thrombolysis. More major vascular events were seen in the thrombolysis group (6.5% compared with 4.4% in the surgically treated group; odds ratio [OR], 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.87; P = .02; I2 = 20%). Comparable limb salvage was found for high- and low-dose recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (r-tPA). No significant differences were found in major vascular event between low r-tPA (14%) and high r-tPA (10.5%; P = .13). The 30-day limb salvage rate was 79.7% for r-tPA treatment and 60.4% for streptokinase (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.26-7.85; P = .01; I2 = 0%). AngioJet showed more limb salvage at 6 months compared with r-tPa (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.17-4.18; P = .01; I2 = 0%). Conclusions Both CDT and surgery have comparable limb salvage rates in patients with ALI; however, CDT is associated with a higher risk of hemorrhagic complications. No conclusions can be drawn regarding the risk of hemorrhagic complications regarding thrombolytic therapy by means of r-tPA, streptokinase, or urokinase. Insufficient data are available to conclude the preference of using a hybrid approach, ultrasound-accelerated CDT, heated r-tPA. or novel endovascular (rheolytical) thrombectomy systems. Future trials regarding ALI need to be constructed carefully, ensuring comparable study groups, and should follow standardized practices of outcome reporting.