Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital

Diagnostic bone imaging in patients with prostate cancer: patient experience and acceptance of NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, whole-body MRI, and bone SPECT/CT

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review


  1. High versus standard magnetic resonance image resolution of the cervical spine in patients with axial spondyloarthritis

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Grading lumbar disc degeneration: a comparison between low- and high-field MRI

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. New Section Editor: Chest Imaging

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleCommunication

  4. New section editor: Abdominal and Gastrointestinal Radiology

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleCommunication

  5. New MSK editor

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleCommunication

View graph of relations

Background Patient acceptance is an important factor when implementing imaging methods in clinical practice in line with availability, diagnostic accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Purpose To investigate patient experience and acceptance regarding18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), 11 C-choline-PET/CT, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI), and 99mTc-hydroxymethane diphosphonate (HDP) single photon emission/computed tomography (SPECT/CT). Material and Methods One hundred and forty-nine patients with prostate cancer filled in a questionnaire regarding their experience of the imaging procedures they had been undergoing as part of a diagnostic accuracy study. Each patient had been undergoing a NaF-PET/CT, a WB-MRI, and either a SPECT/CT (group A) or a choline-PET/CT (group B). Results All four imaging methods received overall experience ratings at the favorable end of a 5-point Likert scale with the two PET/CT scans receiving marginally better average ratings (2.0) compared to SPECT/CT (2.2) and WB-MRI (2.3). The arm positioning above the head was the most uncomfortable part of the three nuclear medicine scans, whereas the acoustic noise was the most unpleasant part of the WB-MRI. The experience of staff instruction was relatively strongly correlated to the overall scanning experience of all four imaging modalities. Overall, the patients were willing to repeat the four imaging methods and NaF-PET/CT was the method most preferred in both groups. Conclusion Four imaging procedures were evaluated from the perspective of a selected group of prostate cancer patients. NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, WB-MRI, and bone SPECT/CT are well accepted imaging methods, and most patients prefer NaF-PET/CT.

Original languageEnglish
JournalActa Radiologica
Issue number9
Pages (from-to)1119-1125
Number of pages7
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2018

    Research areas

  • Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bone Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging, Choline, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography, Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology, Radiopharmaceuticals, Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Computed Tomography, Sodium Fluoride, Surveys and Questionnaires, Technetium Tc 99m Medronate/analogs & derivatives, Whole Body Imaging

ID: 55742222