Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Surg. 2012 Mar 30;204(2):232–241. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.07.025

Table 3.

Publications on Gallbladder Cancer and PET

Gallbladder cancer
Author Year N Conclusion
Rodriguez-Fernandez 2004 16 Sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 82% in identifying GBC in patients with biliary colic Accurate method of differentiating malignant from benign gallbladder disease
Petrowsky 2006 14 Identified 14 out of 14 with primary or recurrent GBC compared to 10 out of 14 using CT Comparable in detecting GBC compared to CT
Corvera 2007 31 Sensitivity of 86% in identifying primary GBC Identified 24 out of 28 patients with primary GBC (Sens: 86%) High detection rate for GBC
Metastasis
Petrowsky 2006 14 Identified 7 out of 7 distant metastases in patients with GBC but only identified 2 out of 17 patients with biliary cancer and regional spread Good for detecting distant but not regional lymph metastasis
Corvera 2007 31 Sensitivity of 87% in identifying metastatic GBC; 7 patients had metastases not previously seen, avoiding surgery in 4 patients Valuable in detecting metastatic GBC not previously seen
Recurrence
Anderson 2004 14 Sensitivity of 78% in detecting residual GBC after cholecystectomy Good for detecting residual GBC

GBC: Gallbladder cancer; PET: Positron emission tomography; US: Ultrasound; CT: Computed tomography; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; RFA: Radio frequency ablation; FDG: Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose; SUV: Standardized uptake value; Sens: Sensitivity; Spec: Specificity