Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and FDG-PET/CT for lymphoma staging: Assessment of patient experience

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare patient experience of whole-body MRI and FDG-PET/CT performed for lymphoma staging. Methods: One-hundred-fifteen patients (59 males, 56 females; 53 Hodgkin, 62 non-Hodgkin; mean age: 43.8 years) with lymphoma underwent whole-body MRI and FDG-PET/CT for staging and filled a questionnaire regarding their experience of the examinations using a 4-point Likert scale (1, very good; 4,very bad). Differences were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Patients were asked to express their preference on both techniques. Preferences were compared on the basis of gender, age, and Ann Arbor stage using the chi-square test. A p-value ≤.05 was considered significant. Results: Most patients found FDG-PET/CT a more burdensome examination than whole-body MRI. Whole-body MRI received a significantly lower score regarding overall satisfaction (p <.05), patient experience before (p <.05) and after (p <.05) scan. No significant difference was found in scan preparation (p =.207) and patient experience during scan (p =.38). The average Likert scores were <2 in all criteria for both types of scan. 54 patients preferred whole-body MRI, 10 preferred FDG-PET/CT, and 51 had no preference. There was no significant difference in technique preference according to gender (p =.73), age (p =.43), and stage (p = 1.00). Conclusions: Whole-body MRI and FDG-PET/CT demonstrate high degree of patients’ acceptance and tolerance.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1043-1047
Number of pages5
JournalTHE EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Volume48
Publication statusPublished - 2017

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and FDG-PET/CT for lymphoma staging: Assessment of patient experience'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this