ArticleActa radiologica open2015
Intra-individual comparison of PET/CT with different body weight-adapted FDG dosage regimens.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative analysis of image metrics for reduced and standard dose pediatricThe British journal of radiology · 2019Trial
- Improved [Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Impact of Region-of-Interest Delineation on Stability and Reproducibility of Liver SNR Measurements inWorld journal of nuclear medicine · 2023Article
- Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A dedicated paediatric [EJNMMI research · 2021Article
- Standardized image quality forEJNMMI research · 2020Article
- Estimation of activity of administeredEJNMMI physics · 2016Article
- Brown Adipose Reporting Criteria in Imaging STudies (BARCIST 1.0): Recommendations for Standardized FDG-PET/CT Experiments in Humans.Cell metabolism · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/ computed tomography (CT) imaging demands guidelines to safeguard sufficient image quality at low radiation exposure. Various FDG dose regimes have been investigated; however, body weight-adapted dose regimens and related image quality (IQ) have not yet been compared in the same patient. PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between FDG dosage and image quality in PET/CT in the same patient and determine prerequisites for low dosage scanning. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis study included 61 patients undergoing a clinically indicated PET/CT imaging study and follow-up with a normal (NDS, 5 MBq/kg body weight [BW]) and low dosage scanning protocol (LDS, 4 MBq/kg BW), respectively, using a Discovery VCT64 scanner. Two blinded and independent readers randomly assessed IQ of PET using a 5-point Likert scale and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the liver.
resultsBody mass index (BMI) was significantly lower at LDS (P = 0.021) and represented a significant predictor of SNR at both NDS (P < 0.001) and LDS (P = 0.005). NDS with a mean administered activity of 340 MBq resulted in significantly higher IQ (P < 0.001) and SNR as compared with LDS with a mean of 264 MBq (F-value = 23.5, P < 0.001, mixed model ANOVA adjusted for covariate BMI). Non-diagnostic IQ at LDS was associated with a BMI > 22 kg/m(2).
conclusionFDG dosage significantly predicts IQ and SNR in PET/CT imaging as demonstrated in the same patient with optimal IQ achieved at 5 MBq/kg BM. PET/CT imaging at 4 MBq/kg BW may only be recommended in patients with a BMI ≤ 22 kg/m(2) to maintain diagnostic IQ.
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.