Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Hepatol. May 27, 2025; 17(5): 105446
Published online May 27, 2025. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v17.i5.105446
Table 1 Comparison of 18-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography computed tomography and conventional imaging in biliary tract cancer
Parameter
18-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography computed tomography
Computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging
Spatial resolutionModerate (4-5 mm)High (0.5-2 mm)
Metabolic activity assessmentYes (based on maximum standardized uptake value or total lesion glycolysis)No
Primary tumour sensitivitySensitive to hypermetabolic tumors, hypometabolism or small lesions (< 5 mm) may be missedShow structural abnormalities and details. Low sensitivity for early lesions
LN metastasis sensitivitySensitive to metabolically active LNs, inflammatory LNs may be misclassified as metastasesDepending on LN size (≥ 10 mm) and enhancement characteristics, easy to miss normal size metastatic LNs
Distant metastasis sensitivityEfficient detection of liver, bone and other sites of metastasisLimited by the scanning range, peritoneal metastasis may be missed
CostHighModerate
Applicable scenarioStaging, recurrence monitoring and prognosis predictionAssessment of anatomical details and local infiltration