Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23673453›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2013

PET/CT versus body coil PET/MRI: how low can you go?

P Appenzeller, C Mader, M W Huellner, D Schmidt, D Schmid, A Boss, G von Schulthess, P Veit-Haibach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Optimized Whole-Body PET MRI Sequence Workflow in Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Improving MR sequence of 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosing and staging gastric Cancer: a comparison study toCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2020
    Article
  5. FDG Whole-Body PET/MRI in Oncology: a Systematic Review.Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2017
    Review
  6. Ionizing radiation exposure as a result of diagnostic imaging in patients with lymphoma.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2016
    Article
  7. 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI Perform Equally Well in Cancer: Evidence from Studies on More Than 2,300 Patients.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2016
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Use of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in PET/MRI for head and neck cancer evaluation.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2014
    Article
  13. Review
  14. PET/MRI and PET/CT in follow-up of head and neck cancer patients.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2014
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Clinical applications of PET/MRI: current status and future perspectives.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)
    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

8 authors.

P AppenzellerDivision of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
C Mader
M W Huellner
D Schmidt
D Schmid
A Boss
G von Schulthess
P Veit-Haibach

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate if positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with just one gradient echo sequence using the body coil is diagnostically sufficient compared with a standard, low-dose non-contrast-enhanced PET/computed tomography (CT) concerning overall diagnostic accuracy, lesion detectability, size and conspicuity evaluation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-three patients (mean age 58 years, range 19-86 years; 23 women, 40 men) referred for either staging or restaging/follow-up of various malignant tumours (malignant melanoma, lung cancer, breast cancer, Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, CUP, gynaecology tumours, pleural mesothelioma, oesophageal cancer, colorectal cancer, stomach cancer) were prospectively included. Imaging was conducted using a tri-modality PET/CT-MR set-up (full ring, time-of-flight Discovery PET/CT 690, 3 T Discovery MR 750, both GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI). All patients were positioned on a dedicated PET/CT- and MR-compatible examination table, allowing for patient transport from the MR system to the PET/CT without patient movement. In accordance with RECIST 1.1 criteria, measurements of the maximum lesion diameters on CT and MR images were obtained. In lymph nodes, the short axis was measured. A four-point scale was used for assessment of lesion conspicuity: 1 (>25 % of lesion borders definable), 2 (25-50 %), 3 (50-75 %) and 4 (>75 %). For each lesion the corresponding anatomical structure was noted based on anatomical information of the spatially co-registered PET/CT and PET/MRI image sections. Additionally, lesions were divided into three categories: "tumour mass", "lymph nodes" and "lesions". Differences in overall lesion detectability and conspicuity in PET/CT and PET/MRI, as well as differences in detectability based on the localisation and lesion type, were analysed by Wilcoxon signed rank test.

resultsA total of 126 PET-positive lesions were evaluated. Overall, no statistically significant superiority of PET/CT over PET/MRI or vice versa in terms of lesion conspicuity was found (p = 0.095; mean score CT 2.93, mean score MRI 2.75). A statistically significant superiority concerning conspicuity of PET/CT over PET/MRI was found in pulmonary lesions (p = 0.016). Additionally, a statistically significant superiority of PET/CT over PET/MRI in "lymph nodes" regarding lesion conspicuity was also found (p = 0.033). A higher mean score concerning bone lesions were found for PET/CT compared with PET/MRI; however, these differences did not achieve statistical significance.

conclusionOverall, PET/MRI with body coil acquisition does not match entirely the diagnostic accuracy of standard low-dose PET/CT. Thus, it might only serve as a back-up solution in very few patients. Overall, more time needs to be invested on the MR imaging part (higher matrix, more breath-holds, additional surface coil acquired sequences) to match up with the standard low-dose PET/CT. MAIN MESSAGES: • Evaluation of whether PET/MRI with one sequence using body coil is diagnostically sufficient compared with PET/CT • PET/MRI with body coil does not match entirely the diagnostic accuracy of standard low-dose PET/CT • PET/MRI might only serve as a backup solution in patients.

Identifiers

PMID23673453
PMCPMC3731468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.