Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24096590›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of radiology2013

SPECT-CT: applications in musculoskeletal radiology.

S Saha, C Burke, A Desai, S Vijayanathan, G Gnanasegaran

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Imaging mimickers of MSK infection.Skeletal radiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Progress in diagnosis of bone metastasis of prostate cancer.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Bone SPECT/CT in the postoperative spine: a focus on spinal fusion.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2017
    Review
  20. Bone scintigraphy in patients with pain.The Korean journal of pain · 2017
    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

5 authors.

S SahaDepartment of Radiology, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.
C Burke
A Desai
S Vijayanathan
G Gnanasegaran

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reviews the technique, basic science principles and applications of integrated single photon emission CT (SPECT)-CT in musculoskeletal radiology. A review of the current evidence on the topic was undertaken, and selected clinical cases from the authors' institution have been used for illustration. SPECT-CT is a technology with emerging applications that offers technical advantages to image fusion of separately acquired SPECT and CT studies. The prevailing evidence indicates that there may be benefit in adding SPECT-CT to conventional imaging algorithms during the evaluation of some malignant and benign musculoskeletal conditions. SPECT-CT can improve both sensitivity and specificity by reducing equivocal interpretation in comparison to planar scintigraphy or SPECT alone. The evidence base for SPECT-CT in musculoskeletal radiology is still evolving. There is a lack of evidence comparing SPECT-CT with MRI in many key indications, and further research is required in these areas.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMusculoskeletal DiseasesRadiopharmaceuticalsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonTomography, X-Ray ComputedRadiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID24096590
PMCPMC3830427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.