Impact of pelvic dynamic acquisition on final reading of 18F‐Fluorocholine positron emission tomography in patients with prostate adenocarcinoma: True need or unnecessary burden?

Introduction: Despite the increasing use of 18F‐fluorocholine (18F‐FCH) positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with prostate cancer, the acquisition protocol remains debated. We have evaluated the influence of the pelvic dynamic phase on the final reading of whole‐body 18F‐FCH PET, to assess the need for a two‐stage protocol. Reading the physician's experience and patient's previous treatment profile was also considered as potential influencing factors on final PET interpretation. Methods: All 18F‐FCH PET/CT performed from January 2018 to September 2019 in patients with prostate cancer and including a pelvic dynamic phase followed by a delayed whole‐body acquisition were retrospectively retrieved. PET/CT were analysed by one expert nuclear medicine physician and one resident. The whole‐body scan was analysed blinded (first reading) and nonblinded from the results of the dynamic phase. Results: 221 consecutive PET/CT were selected from 201 patients previously treated by radical prostatectomy (n = 31), pelvic radiation therapy (n = 60), or both (n = 94). 24 patients had no previous treatments, and 12 benefited from other focal treatments. In the whole population, dynamic acquisition modified final interpretation of 32/221 scans (14.5%) for residents, 26 (11.8%) for experts and 19 (8.6%) for consensual reading. No influence of previous treatments was found. The availability of a dynamic phase would have been responsible for treatment modification in 5/221 scans (2.3%). Considering only the prostate bed, dynamic acquisition modified the final interpretation in 7/125 (5.6%) studies (consensual reading) from patients with previous prostatic surgery and 4/84 (4.8%) scans from patients without a history of prostatic surgical intervention. No significant influence of dynamic acquisition was found on the final PET interpretation on prostate lodge accordingly to previous prostatic surgery. Conclusion: The dynamic phase changes the interpretation of 18F‐FCH PET in about 9% of cases and the therapeutic strategy in <3% of patients. The influence of the early phase reduces with physician experience. Patient's treatment profile does not appear to have a significant influence on the variability of interpretation, also including the prostate bed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]