评估和比较[18F]FLT-PET与ceMRI对脑肿瘤或其他局灶性病变患者的诊断能力。本回顾性研究纳入了121名疑似脑肿瘤或脑肿瘤手术后的患者（61名女性，60名男性） ，平均年龄 37.3 岁，范围 1-80 岁）。所有患者均接受[18F]FLT-PET/MRI 应用钆造影剂。对其中 118 名患者做出了最终诊断，并通过组织病理学或随访进行验证。整个研究组的 ceMRI 和 [18F]FLT-PET 之间建立了一致性。此外，还计算了 ceMRI 和 [18F]FLT-PET 的敏感性和特异性，以区分高级别肿瘤与低级别肿瘤、高级别肿瘤与低级别肿瘤与非肿瘤病变以及区分高级别肿瘤和低级别肿瘤。来自所有其他已验证病变的分级肿瘤。[18F]FLT-PET 和 ceMRI 结果在 119 例病例 (98%) 中一致。对 64 名确诊神经胶质瘤患者的子集进行更仔细的分析后发现，如果对比增强和 [ 18F]FLT 摄取被认为是高级肿瘤的标志。在 93 名患者的亚组中，通过目视评估区分高级别肿瘤和低级别肿瘤以及非肿瘤病因病变（例如炎症病变或治疗后变化），PET 和 ceMRI 的敏感性均为 90%，而PET 的特异性 (61%) 略高于 ceMRI (57%)。通过受试者操作特征分析，当肿瘤中 SUVmax 的阈值设置为 0.9 g/ml 时，敏感性和特异性分别为 82% 和 74%。我们证明 [18F]FLT 积累与对比剂总体上具有非常高的相关性ceMRI 上可见增强效果，两种方法的诊断率相当，可区分高级别肿瘤和低级别肿瘤以及其他病因的病变。© 2024。作者。

To evaluate and compare the diagnostic power of [18F]FLT-PET with ceMRI in patients with brain tumours or other focal lesions.121 patients with suspected brain tumour or those after brain tumour surgery were enroled in this retrospective study (61 females, 60 males, mean age 37.3 years, range 1-80 years). All patients underwent [18F]FLT-PET/MRI with gadolinium contrast agent application. In 118 of these patients, a final diagnosis was made, verified by histopathology or by follow-up. Agreement between ceMRI and [18F]FLT-PET of the whole study group was established. Further, sensitivity and specificity of ceMRI and [18F]FLT-PET were calculated for differentiation of high-grade vs. low-grade tumours, high-grade vs. low-grade tumours together with non-tumour lesions and for differentiation of high-grade tumours from all other verified lesions.[18F]FLT-PET and ceMRI findings were concordant in 119 cases (98%). On closer analysis of a subset of 64 patients with verified gliomas, the sensitivity and specificity of both PET and ceMRI were identical (90% and 84%, respectively) for differentiating low-grade from high-grade tumours, if the contrast enhancement and [18F]FLT uptake were considered as hallmarks of high-grade tumour. For differentiation of high-grade tumours from low-grade tumours and lesions of nontumorous aetiology (e.g., inflammatory lesions or post-therapeutic changes) in a subgroup of 93 patients by visual evaluation, the sensitivity of both PET and ceMRI was 90%, whereas the specificity of PET was slightly higher (61%) compared to ceMRI (57%). By receiver operating characteristic analysis, the sensitivity and specificity were 82% and 74%, respectively, when the threshold of SUVmax in the tumour was set to 0.9 g/ml.We demonstrated a generally very high correlation of [18F]FLT accumulation with contrast enhancement visible on ceMRI and a comparable diagnostic yield in both modalities for differentiating high-grade tumours from low-grade tumours and lesions of other aetiology.© 2024. The Author(s).