ArticleThe Indian journal of radiology & imaging2012
Etiology and significance of incidentally detected focal colonic uptake on FDG PET/CT.
Article in The Indian journal of radiology & imaging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidental colorectal FDG uptake on PET/CT scan and lesions observed during subsequent colonoscopy: a systematic review.Techniques in coloproctology · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- Focal incidental colorectal fluorodeoxyglucose uptake: Should it be spotlighted?World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Unexpected focal fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in main organs; pass through or pass by?World journal of clinical cases · 2024Review
- Assessment of incidental focal colorectal uptake by analysis of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography parameters.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- Incidental colorectal focalEndoscopy international open · 2017Article
- Focal colorectal uptake in (18)FDG-PET/CT: maximum standard uptake value as a trigger in a semi-automated screening setting.European journal of medical research · 2016Article
- Incidental gastrointestinal 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake associated with lung cancer.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2015Article
- Comparative study of ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT imaging and serum hTERT mRNA quantification in cancer diagnosis.Cancer medicine · 2015Article
- Focal Colonic FDG Activity with PET/CT: Guidelines for Recommendation of Colonoscopy.World journal of nuclear medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncidental colonic uptake of 18F-flurodeoxyglucose (FDG) is not an infrequent finding encountered during whole body positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. Almost all studies on this topic are in Western populations, which have a markedly different epidemiological profile for colorectal premalignant and malignant conditions as compared to that of the Indian subcontinent.
aimThe purpose of this study was to assess the etiology of incidentally detected focal FDG uptake in the colon by comparing it with colonoscopy and histopathology. MATERIALS AND
methodsElectronic medical records of patients who underwent FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) at our institution for a 2½-year period from January 2009 to July 2011 were reviewed. There were 32 out of 9000 (0.35%) patients whose PET/CT reports mentioned incidental focal colonic FDG uptake, of which 24 patients subsequently underwent colonoscopy. Lesions which appeared neoplastic on colonoscopy were confirmed with histopathology obtained after biopsy or surgery. Colonoscopy and pathology findings were considered as gold standard.
resultsAmong the 24 patients who underwent a colonoscopy, 3 patients had normal findings (12.5%). A positive colonoscopy was noted in 21 patients (87.5%) with the lesion coinciding with the location described in the PET/CT report. Adenomatous polyps were detected in 12 patients (37.5%), whereas in 8 patients (25%) malignant lesions were confirmed [adenocarcinoma n = 5, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) n = 2, malignant melanoma n = 1]. In one patient, colonic uptake was diagnosed as inflammatory. The mean standardized uptake valuemax (SUVmax) for the 12 premalignant lesions was 16.9 ± 9.6 (range 7.5-37.4) and the mean SUVmax for the 8 malignant lesions was 12.9 ± 5.5 (range 6.7-21.6). The difference in SUVmax between the premalignant adenomatous polyps and the malignant lesions was not statistically significant (P = 0.316).
conclusionsOur study shows that a significant proportion of patients (62.5%, 20/32) showing an incidental focal FDG uptake will harbor premalignant (adenomatous polyps) or malignant lesions, and further evaluation with colonoscopy and biopsy is warranted in such cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.