UNLABELLED This prospective study compared a 1-d SPECT/CT protocol with the commonly used 3-d protocol for somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. Additionally, the influence of SPECT/CT on patient management was evaluated. METHODS From October 2011 to October 2012, all gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm patients undergoing restaging with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy on a modern SPECT/CT device were enrolled in this study. The protocol consisted of planar imaging at 4, 24, and 48 h; low-dose SPECT/CT at 24 and 48 h; diagnostic CT at 24 h using a triple-phase delay after administration of contrast; and diagnostic SPECT/CT at 24 h. All components of the imaging data were reassessed by 3 masked interpreters. The results were compared with a reference standard based on all clinical, imaging, and histopathology follow-up data available (follow-up range, 24-36 mo; mean, 29.9 mo). The reference standard was defined by a study-specific interdisciplinary tumor board that also reassessed treatment decisions. RESULTS Thirty-one patients were eligible for analysis (18 men and 13 women; mean age, 60.4 y). Ten had no imaging signs of disease and remained disease-free during follow-up. Twenty-one had persistent or recurrent disease (82 lesions: 24 in the liver, 21 in the lymph nodes, 16 in bone, 12 in the pancreas, and 9 in other locations). The respective lesion detection rates for interpreters 1, 2, and 3 were 51.9%, 49.4%, and 71.6% for low-dose SPECT/CT at 24 h; 51.9%, 55.6%, and 67.9% for low-dose SPECT/CT at 48 h; 63.0%, 70.4%, and 85.2% for diagnostic CT; and 77.8%, 84.0%, and 88.9% for diagnostic SPECT/CT. Interobserver agreement was moderate for diagnostic SPECT/CT (κ = 0.44), diagnostic CT (κ = 0.43), low-dose SPECT/CT at 48 h (κ = 0.61), and low-dose SPECT/CT at 24 h (κ = 0.55). For planar imaging, interobserver agreement was fair after 48 h (κ = 0.36) and 24 h (κ = 0.38) and moderate after 4 h (κ = 0.42). Every lesion detectable on planar imaging or low-dose SPECT/CT was also detectable on diagnostic SPECT/CT. The CT and SPECT components of diagnostic SPECT/CT strongly complemented each other, as 34 of 82 lesions (41.4%) were detected on only the CT component or only the SPECT component. Therapeutic management was influenced by the diagnostic SPECT/CT interpretation in 8 of 31 patients (25.8%). CONCLUSION The highest detection rates were achieved by diagnostic SPECT/CT. Thus, a more patient-friendly 1-d protocol is feasible. Furthermore, multiphase SPECT/CT affected management in about a quarter of patients.
Significance of a Single-Time-Point Somatostatin Receptor SPECT/Multiphase CT Protocol in the Diagnostic Work-up of Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.