• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Technology
    • AI
    • History of Otolaryngology
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
    • SUO Corner
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Clinicians Question Usefulness of Multiple Post-Treatment PET/CT Scans for Head and Neck Cancer

by Bryn Nelson, PhD • September 1, 2013

  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

You Might Also Like

  • HN Cancer Patients with Negative Imaging History Derive Limited Benefit from Subsequent PET-CT
  • PET/CT Useful for Head and Neck Cancers, with Limitations
  • When Should Surveillance Imaging Be Performed After Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer?
  • PET Not Ready for Routine Management of Head and Neck Cancer
Explore This Issue
September 2013
A fused PET/CT scan shows a subtle hypopharyngeal tumor responsible for large metastatic nodes in the right neck. Evaluation of unknown primary tumors is one of the many well-established indications for PET/CT in head and neck oncology.

A fused PET/CT scan shows a subtle hypopharyngeal tumor responsible for large metastatic nodes in the right neck. Evaluation of unknown primary tumors is one of the many well-established indications for PET/CT in head and neck oncology.

Variable Protocols?

A lack of agreement beyond those few points, however, has resulted in widely variable institution-specific protocols and spirited debates. Last year, for example, Dr. Gourin’s group practice agreed to restrict its surveillance to a single PET/CT scan at three months after non-surgical treatment, unless the patient displays a new symptom, a physical exam reveals an abnormality or the scan itself is abnormal or indeterminate. One exception to that rule is made for patients with a history of heavy smoking, who may benefit from NCCN guidelines for post-treatment lung cancer surveillance.

“We want to know, what if we hadn’t done that one, would it still have worked out well for the patient? By putting in place a protocol that overutilizes, it’s easier to measure how much you’ve overutilized. If you put in a protocol that underutilizes, you’ll never know what you could have accomplished.”

—Barton F. Branstetter IV, MD

A forthcoming study of 134 patients in the Journal of Nuclear Medicine suggests that the university’s single PET/CT scan identified unsuspected recurrence or metastasis in about 5 percent of asymptomatic patients. Conversely, the scan yielded a negative predictive value of 98 percent.

At the University of Iowa, surveillance scans are similarly reserved for symptomatic patients or those treated for advanced stage cancer. Doctors conduct two restaging exams, however: the first at three months and the second after a year. “If somebody has a squeaky clean, one-year post-treatment PET/CT scan, then I think you’re treading on pretty thin ice if you want to start ordering more in the absence of any symptoms or exam findings,” said Gerry Funk, MD, professor of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery and director of the division of head and neck oncology. Nevertheless, he cautioned that doctors have very little good data about the utility of long-term serial PET/CT scans in that patient population.

Among the medical center’s patients, Dr. Funk said, researchers found that a restaging PET/CT scan at 12 months came back positive about 10 percent of the time in asymptomatic patients. About 3 percent of all tested patients had treatable disease, a result he described as “a pretty reasonable yield.”

Meanwhile, at the University of Pittsburgh, clinicians perform the first PET/CT surveillance scan two months after treatment and repeat the process every three months through 14 months, meaning that many patients receive five scans in all. This protocol has drawn criticism from other researchers, and Dr. Branstetter readily acknowledged that the medical center is likely overutilizing PET/CT scans, but he argued that it’s part of an intentional big-picture research strategy. “We want to know, what if we hadn’t done that one? Would it still have worked out well for the patient?” he said. “By putting in place a protocol that overutilizes, it’s easier to measure how much you’ve overutilized. If you put in a protocol that underutilizes, you’ll never know what you could have accomplished.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Filed Under: Features, Head and Neck, Practice Focus Tagged With: CT Scan, head and neck cancer, PET scan, post-treatment, surveillanceIssue: September 2013

You Might Also Like:

  • HN Cancer Patients with Negative Imaging History Derive Limited Benefit from Subsequent PET-CT
  • PET/CT Useful for Head and Neck Cancers, with Limitations
  • When Should Surveillance Imaging Be Performed After Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer?
  • PET Not Ready for Routine Management of Head and Neck Cancer

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Have you used AI to submit documentation to insurance companies in response to a denial?

View Results

Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Is the SLOR in Otolaryngology Residency Applications Contributing to Rural Disparities?
  • Applications Open for Resident Members of the ENTtoday Editorial Board: Deadline Extended
  • A Resident’s View of AI in Otolaryngology
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • Resident Pearls: Pediatric Otolaryngologists Share Tips for Safer, Smarter Tonsillectomies
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • Some Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Resists PPI Treatment
    • Vocal Cord Leukoplakia Management Trends Include Advanced Surgical Techniques, Voice Preservation
    • Empty Nose Syndrome: Physiological, Psychological, or Perhaps a Little of Both?
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • What Is the Extent of Neck Dissection in Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma?
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?
    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment
    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name
    • The Battle of the Bots Comes to Prior Authorization
    • How to Avoid These 10 Difficult Airway Pitfalls
    • Getting Comfortable Being Uncomfortable
    • Comparative Study of TMRT for Chronic Otitis Media
    • Early and Sustained Improvements in Sense of Smell with Tezepelumab Treatment in Patients with CRSwNP (WAYPOINT)

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2026 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939