ArticleNuclear medicine and molecular imaging2011
Significance of SUV on Follow-up F-18 FDG PET at the Anastomotic Site of Gastroduodenostomy after Distal Subtotal Gastrectomy in Patients with Gastric Cancer.
Article in Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Diagnostic performance of FDG PET/CT for surveillance in asymptomatic gastric cancer patients after curative surgical resection.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Article
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
purposeThe aim of this study was to characterize the patterns of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake on F-18 FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) at the anastomotic site of gastroduodenostomy after distal subtotal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer.
methodsFrom May 2007 to May 2010, two or more follow-up measurements using FDG PET/CT scans were done for 19 patients (11 men, 8 women; mean age, 62.0 ± 10.3 years) who underwent distal subtotal gastrectomy with gastroduodenostomy between February 2006 and March 2008 for detecting gastric cancer recurrence at our medical center. The FDG PET/CT images were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with local recurrence, regional nodal metastasis or distant metastasis on follow-up studies were excluded. CT and endoscopy were done within 1 month before or after the FDG PET/CT scan. Eight patients had two follow-ups of FDG PET/CT, and 11 patients had three follow-ups. The mean interval between surgery and the first follow-up FDG PET/CT was 12.9 ± 0.8 months (n = 19); between the first and second it was 12.3 ± 1.0 months (n = 19); between the second and third it was 11.6 ± 0.7 months (n = 11). The F-18 FDG uptakes at the anastomotic site and fundus in the remnant stomach were measured by maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) using a region of interest technique.
resultsThe SUVmax at the anastomotic site was significantly higher than that of the fundus on all series of first, second and third follow-up studies (3.3 ± 1.1 vs. 2.1 ± 0.7, p < 0.001: 3.1 ± 0.9 vs. 2.2 ± 0.7, p = 0.001: 3.0 ± 0.6 vs. 2.1 ± 0.7, p = 0.006, respectively). The SUVmax for the anastomotic site and fundus, and SUVmax ratio for the anastomotic site over the fundus were not significantly different throughout the series.
conclusionThe SUVmax at the anastomotic site is significantly higher than that of the fundus and does not decrease significantly over time. Therefore, the local recurrence of gastric cancer after surgery could not be definitely differentiated from physiologic uptake or postoperative inflammatory change.
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.