Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Pitfalls of FDG-PET in the prostate for the surgical oncologist.|
|Authors:||O'Connor, Ellen;Teh, Jiasian;Bolton, Damien M|
|Affiliation:||Department of Surgery, Austin Health, The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia|
Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
|Citation:||Urology case reports 2020; 33: 101262|
|Abstract:||A 78-year-old man was referred for investigation of prostate cancer following incidental uptake on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET). Despite normal PSA and benign digital rectal exam, he was referred for consideration of trans-perineal biopsy to exclude prostate cancer. It was only on review of imaging that it became clearly apparent that the 18F-FDG uptake was due to urinary tracer pooling in a trans-urethral resection cavity. Surgeons, oncologists and nuclear medicine physicians should be aware of this common pitfall in interpretation of 18F-FDG-PET in the prostate.|
Transurethral resection of prostate
|Appears in Collections:||Journal articles|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.