# High 18F-FDG Uptake in Benign Pathologies: A Challenge in Oncological PET/CT Imaging

## Authors

- Sevin Ayaz ([ORCID](https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8509-5832)) — Department of Medical Imaging Techniques, Toros University, Vocational School

## Article information

- **Journal:** The Ulutas Medical Journal (Ulutas Med J), ISSN 2149-388X
- **Issue:** Volume 3, Issue 3 (2017), pages 57–58
- **Article type:** Letter to the Editor
- **Published online:** 2017-09-29
- **DOI:** [10.5455/umj.20170312084153](https://doi.org/10.5455/umj.20170312084153)
- **Licence:** [CC BY-NC 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
- **Article page:** https://www.ulutasmedicaljournal.com/?mno=260269
- **PDF:** https://www.ulutasmedicaljournal.com/pdf/260269.pdf

## Abstract

Though 18F-FDG uptake due to benign pathologies is usually less than that of the malignant tumors, some overlap can occur between these two distinct entities. In order to differentiate benign FDG uptake from malignant, the image interpreter should get a detailed patient history (surgical and clinical history, previous and recent therapies, history of trauma etc.) and evaluate all the previously obtained radiological and scintigraphic images of the patient. In case of a need, laboratory tests and/or other imaging methods such as ultrasonography and MRI should be performed, in accordance with other disciplines. Stability of these lesions on follow-up scans is an important clue for benignity.

## Keywords

18F-FDG Uptake; Benign Pathologies; Oncological PET/CT Imaging

## How to cite

Ayaz S. High 18F-FDG Uptake in Benign Pathologies: A Challenge in Oncological PET/CT Imaging. Ulutas Med J. 2017;3(3):57-58. doi:10.5455/umj.20170312084153

## References

1. Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015;42:328– 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2961-x
2. Abouzied MM, Crawford ES, Nabi HA. 18F-FDG imaging: pitfalls and artifacts. J Nucl Med Technol 2005;33:145−55.
3. Carter KR, Kotlyarov E. Common causes of false positive F FDG PET/CT scans in oncology. Braz Arch Biol Technol 2007;50:29−35. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-89132007000600004
4. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, Brown ML, Royal HD, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med 2006;47: 885−95.
5. Sahani DV, Bonaffini PA, Catalano OA, Guimaraes AR, Blake MA. State-of-the-art PET/CT of the pancreas: current role and emerging indications. Radiographics 2012;32: 1133−58. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.324115143
6. Shammas A, Lim R, Charron M. Pediatric FDG PET/CT: physiologic uptake, normal variants, and benign conditions. Radiographics 2009;29:1467−86. To submit your manuscript, please click on https://www.ulutasmedicaljournal.com https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.295085247