Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23431436›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular imaging2013

Comparison of five parathyroid scintigraphic protocols.

Virpi Tunninen, Pekka Varjo, Jukka Schildt, Aapo Ahonen, Tomi Kauppinen, Irina Lisinen, Anu Holm, Hannu Eskola, Marko Seppänen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular imaging, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Locating hyperfunctioning parathyroid glands usingEuropean journal of hybrid imaging · 2021
    Article
  3. International journal of molecular imaging · 2017
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Virpi TunninenDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Satakunta Central Hospital, Sairaalantie 3, 28500 Pori, Finland.
Pekka Varjo
Jukka Schildt
Aapo Ahonen
Tomi Kauppinen
Irina Lisinen
Anu Holm
Hannu Eskola
Marko Seppänen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives. We compared five parathyroid scintigraphy protocols in patients with primary (pHPT) and secondary hyperparathyroidism (sHPT) and studied the interobserver agreement. The dual-tracer method ((99m)Tc-sestamibi/(123)I) was used with three acquisition techniques (parallel-hole planar, pinhole planar, and SPECT/CT). The single-tracer method ((99m)Tc-sestamibi) was used with two acquisition techniques (double-phase parallel-hole planar, and SPECT/CT). Thus five protocols were used, resulting in five sets of images. Materials and Methods. Image sets of 51 patients were retrospectively graded by four experienced nuclear medicine physicians. The final study group consisted of 24 patients (21 pHPT, 3 sHPT) who had been operated upon. Surgical and histopathologic findings were used as the standard of comparison. Results. Thirty abnormal parathyroid glands were found in 24 patients. The sensitivities of the dual-tracer method (76.7-80.0%) were similar (P = 1.0). The sensitivities of the single-tracer method (13.3-31.6%) were similar (P = 0.625). All differences in sensitivity between these two methods were statistically significant (P < 0.012). The interobserver agreement was good. Conclusion. This study indicates that any dual-tracer protocol with (99m)Tc-sestamibi and (123)I is superior for enlarged parathyroid gland localization when compared with single-tracer protocols using (99m)Tc-sestamibi alone. The parathyroid scintigraphy was found to be independent of the reporter.

Identifiers

PMID23431436
PMCPMC3564434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.