How significant is incidental colorectal involvement in PET-CT?

Creative Commons License

Bulut A., Oğur K., Atıcı A. E., Akın M. İ.

II.International Colorectal Surgery Congress, Antalya, Türkiye, 16 - 20 Mayıs 2023, ss.30, (Özet Bildiri)

  • Yayın Türü: Bildiri / Özet Bildiri
  • Basıldığı Şehir: Antalya
  • Basıldığı Ülke: Türkiye
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.30
  • Marmara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

S-037 How significant is incidental colorectal involvement in PET-CT?

Kemal Oğur, Muhammed İkbal Akın, Alisina Bulut, Ali Emre Atıcı

Marmara University; Department of General Surgery

Objective: In this study, we aimed to investigate the importance of colon involvement in patients who underwent PET-CT for any reason.

Materials-Methods: All colonoscopy procedures performed in the endoscopy unit of Marmara University Faculty of Medicine General Surgery Clinic in 2022 were examined. Among these procedures, a study group was formed from patients with an indication of incidental colorectal suspicious involvement (increased fdg-18 uptake). Age, gender, reason for PET-CT, suspicious fdg-18 uptake area and suvmax value, chemotherapy history and colonoscopy findings of these patients were statistically analyzed.

Results: It was seen that a total of 1866 colonoscopy procedures were performed in 2022. Among these patients, 42 (2.25%) patients underwent colonoscopy due to incidental colorectal involvement in PET-CT. Normal total colonoscopy findings were observed in 21 (50%) of the patients. Colonoscopic and histopathological benign findings (colitis, lymphoplasmocytic cell increase, hyperplastic polyp, etc.) were detected in 5 (11.9%) patients. Colonoscopic and histopathological premalignant findings were detected in 6 (14.2%) patients. Colon cancer was diagnosed in 3 (7.1%) patients. These 3 patients with colorectal malignancy were also patients who underwent PET-CT during Medical Oncology treatment and follow-up. 2 out of 3 patients already had a diagnosis of malignancy. One was under follow-up and treatment because of pancreatic and the other intracranial malignancy. The third patient was a newly diagnosed patient who was investigated for primary malignancy. However, in 7 (%16,6) patients, colonic mucosal pathology such as adenomatous polyp was detected outside the location indicated by PET-CT.

Conclusion: Although colorectal involvement detected incidentally in Pet-ct is not a strong evidence of malignancy, there is a possibility of detecting pre-malignant lesions. It is most appropriate to make an endoscopy decision by evaluating the pet-ct findings on a patient basis.

Keywords: incidental PET-CT findings; colonoscopic equivalent