PET Scan

[lisacurtin]

hi everyone,

Quick question - Does a PET Scan show bone involvement? My dad is experiencing a great deal of pain recently in his spine. His last PET was good, due to be rescanned again in July, but I am worried that it might be in his bone. Hopefully, it is still fluid in his lung from the radiation, but he says it is different pain now. He does have a call into the doctor, after alot of pressure from his girls. This is so hard

Sending sunshine to everyone - Thanks

[Connie B]

Dear Lisa,

Sorry to hear about your dad. I would say a BONE SCAN is in order. I don't think PET scan's show bone. Hence the reason why they do Bone Scans.

Good luck to you and your dad.

[john]

It seems Pet scans will show bone mets. In most of the cases in this following study a bone scan was done to confirm, but I think the pet scan would show something

Abstract:

Purpose : The aim of this retrospective study was to report the prevalence and imaging characteristics of bone metastases detected with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and, when possible, compare these findings with the performance of bone scans in the same patients.

Methods : The reports of 403 patients with histologically proved malignant disease who underwent a PET scan for initial or post-therapeutic staging were reviewed for the presence of possible bone metastases. Based on the final diagnosis confirmed by histopathologic analysis or clinical follow-up, the PET findings of patients with positive bone metastases were evaluated in terms of location, intensity, and patterns. When the PET scan was positive, the PET results were compared with the findings of available bone scans.

Results : PET studies suggested the presence of bone metastases in 38 patients (9%). No follow-up data were available for 9 patients, and the remaining 29 were evaluated further. Of these patients, 6 had false-positive findings, whereas bone metastatic involvement was clinically confirmed in 23 patients. The primary malignant findings included lung cancer (n = 9), esophageal cancer (n = 3), lymphoma (n = 2), melanoma (n = 2), thyroid cancer (n = 2), breast cancer (n = 1), colon cancer (n = 1), prostate cancer (n = 1), testicular cancer (n = 1), and nasopharyngeal cancer (n = 1). On PET, 5 patients had a solitary metastatic focus (22%), and the remaining 18 patients had multiple lesions (78%). The vertebrae were the most frequently involved bones (74%), followed by pelvic bones (70%), ribs (65%), upper extremities including the scapula (48%), sternum (43%), and lower extremities (43%). The patterns of abnormal uptake were classified into three groups: focal (15 patients, 65%), diffuse (2 patients, 9%), and a mixed pattern (6 patients, 26%). Most of the lesions showed intense abnormal uptake (18 patients, 78%); 5 patients had both intense and moderate FDG uptake. Thirteen of the 23 patients with confirmed bone metastases also had a bone scan, which revealed positive bone disease in all of these patients. However, PET consistently revealed more metastatic foci than did the bone scan on a lesion basis.

Conclusions : The most frequent pattern of detectable bone metastases with FDG-PET imaging was multiple foci of intense uptake. PET revealed more lesions than did bone scanning, independent of the type of cancer or location of bone involvement, in patients who were accurately diagnosed by FDG-PET imaging.

[john]

Remember though that no test is 100%.

Quote is from the link below

I had a bone scan and a cat scan and both were negative for bone mets. However the PET scan picked it up and MRI confirmed it. keep looking!!!! hugs trudy

http://www.medhelp.org/forums/BreastCan ... /2318.html

[Don Wood]

I am sure Lucie's bone mets have highlighted in the PET scans. Bone scans are also done. Don