Comparison of 4D computed tomography and F‐18 fluorocholine PET for localisation of parathyroid lesions in primary hyperparathyroidism: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) is the standard of care for primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT). Four dimensional computed tomography(4DCT) and F‐18 Fluorocholine positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FCH PET/CT) localize adenomas accurately to perform MIP. We aimed to conduct...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical endocrinology (Oxford) 2023-09, Vol.99 (3), p.262-271
Main Authors: Patel, Dhrumil Deveshkumar, Bhattacharjee, Samiksha, Pandey, Avaneesh Kumar, Kopp, Chirag Rajkumar, Ashwathanarayana, Abhiram G., Patel, Himani Vinayak, Barnabas, Rohit, Bhadada, Sanjay Kumar, Dodamani, Manjunath Havalappa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
4DCT
Body measurements
Computed tomography
FCH PET/CT
Hyperparathyroidism
Localization
Medical imaging
Meta-analysis
Parathyroid
parathyroid adenoma
Parathyroidectomy
Patients
PHPT
Positron emission tomography
Systematic review
Tomography
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) is the standard of care for primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT). Four dimensional computed tomography(4DCT) and F‐18 Fluorocholine positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FCH PET/CT) localize adenomas accurately to perform MIP. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and metanalysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 4DCT and FCH PET/CT scan for quadrant wise localisation in PHPT patients and to do head‐to‐head comparison between these two modalities. Design, Patients and Measurement  After searching through PubMed and EMBASE databases, 46 studies (using histology as a gold standard) of 4DCT and FCH PET/CT were included. Results Total number of patients included were 1651 and 952 for 4DCT scan (studies n = 26) and FCH PET/CT scan (studies n = 24) respectively. In per patient analysis, FCH PET/CT and 4DCT had pooled sensitivities of 92% (88−94) and 85% (73−92) respectively and in per lesion analysis, 90% (86−93) and 79% (71−84), respectively. In the subgroup with negative conventional imaging/persistent PHPT, FCH PET/CT had comparable sensitivity to 4DCT (84% [74−90] vs. 72% [46−88]). As per patient wise analysis, FCH PET/CT had better detection rates than 4DCT ([92.4 vs. 76.85], odds ratio −3.89 [1.6−9.36] p = .0024) in the subpopulation where both FCH PET/CT and 4DCT were reported. Conclusion Both 4DCT and FCH PET/CT scan performed well in newly diagnosed patients, patients with persistent disease and in those with inconclusive conventional imaging results. FCH PET/CT scan had a higher pooled sensitivity than 4DCT in detecting patients with PHPT in head to head comparison.
ISSN:0300-0664
1365-2265
DOI:10.1111/cen.14875