ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2015
Cross-modality PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT imaging for pancreatic cancer.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Imaging-based diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of direct comparative studies.European radiology · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Added Value of Concurrent Contrast-enhanced Diagnostic CT for PSMA-PET/CT Interpretation.Academic radiology · 2025Article
- Identification of SMAD4-mutated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI and clinical characteristics.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
- Combined positron emission tomography and contrast enhanced CT (PET/CeCT) is a feasible single investigation in the staging of oesophagogastric cancers: single-centre pilot study experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024Article
- Comprehensive literature review of oral and intravenous contrast-enhanced PET/CT: a step forward?Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- The clinical application ofTranslational cancer research · 2021Review
- The Value ofFrontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- A radiomics model that predicts lymph node status in pancreatic cancer to guide clinical decision making: A retrospective study.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- A Panel of CA19-9, Ca125, and Ca15-3 as the Enhanced Test for the Differential Diagnosis of the Pancreatic Lesion.Disease markers · 2017Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore the diagnostic value of the cross-modality fusion images provided by positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for pancreatic cancer (PC).
methodsData from 70 patients with pancreatic lesions who underwent CECT and PET/CT examinations at our hospital from August 2010 to October 2012 were analyzed. PET/CECT for the cross-modality image fusion was obtained using TureD software. The diagnostic efficiencies of PET/CT, CECT and PET/CECT were calculated and compared with each other using a χ(2) test. P < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.
resultsOf the total 70 patients, 50 had PC and 20 had benign lesions. The differences in the sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy between CECT and PET/CECT in detecting PC were statistically significant (P < 0.05 for each). In 15 of the 31 patients with PC who underwent a surgical operation, peripancreatic vessel invasion was verified. The differences in the sensitivity, positive predictive value, NPV, and accuracy of CECT vs PET/CT and PET/CECT vs PET/CT in diagnosing peripancreatic vessel invasion were statistically significant (P < 0.05 for each). In 19 of the 31 patients with PC who underwent a surgical operation, regional lymph node metastasis was verified by postsurgical histology. There was no statistically significant difference among the three methods in detecting regional lymph node metastasis (P > 0.05 for each). In 17 of the 50 patients with PC confirmed by histology or clinical follow-up, distant metastasis was confirmed. The differences in the sensitivity and NPV between CECT and PET/CECT in detecting distant metastasis were statistically significant (P < 0.05 for each).
conclusionCross-modality image fusion of PET/CT and CECT is a convenient and effective method that can be used to diagnose and stage PC, compensating for the defects of PET/CT and CECT when they are conducted individually.
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.