CT versus PET

I think this was mentioned before on the boards, but can somebody refresh my memory here?

As it was previously said that MRI is more sensitive than CT in picking up brain tumors as small as mm's, how sensitive is it for the rest of the body, in comparisons of CT versus PET?

Hi Jo Jo,
This is how i understand it. Ct is usually better for soft tissue things, like in the abdomen,liver. Mri is usually better for bony things like spines. Since brain tumors are near the skull, mri's are better. Pets, i'm told, show bony and soft tissue, because its goes more by the metabolism of the cancer. Cancer uses sugar faster then other cells, and the radioactive dye they use has a sugar substance that goes right to the cell. So the cells light up if they are cancer. It can show a 5mm tumor as a mri,ct usually shows a 1 cm. Pets aren't perfect though, there is alot of false positves. Just like my thyroid lighting up. I know of a guy that had a lung thing light up and they bx'd it and it was ok. I think there is more false positives with it then false negatives. I guess it's better that way so you don't miss anything.Hope that helps

Many thanks, Michele. Glad that your thyroids are all ok now. :-)

EOM