Table 2.
Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET in the detection of recurrent endometrial cancer
| Study | Technique | Patients | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Negative predictive value (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chung et al.[40] | PET/CT | 31a | 100 | 94.7 | 96.8 |
| Park et al.[41] | PET and PET/CT | 24 suspected recurrence | 100 | 83.3 | 100 |
| PET and PET/CT | 64 asymptomatic surveillance | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
| Kitajima et al.[42] | PET/low-dose CT | 100b | 83 | 94 | |
| PET/contrast-enhanced CT | 100b | 90 | 97 |
a20 with histologic confirmation, 11 with imaging follow-up.
b55 women with cervix cancer and 45 women with endometrial cancer.