Observational studyMedicine2017
PET/CT for differentiating between tuberculous peritonitis and peritoneal carcinomatosis: The parietal peritoneum.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. 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.
- Great peritoneal pretenders: imaging mimickers of peritoneal carcinomatosis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Diagnostic value of serum CA125 combined with PET/CT in ovarian cancer and tuberculous peritonitis in female patients.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Article
- Clinical and Radiological Parameters to Discriminate Tuberculous Peritonitis and Peritoneal Carcinomatosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Pretreatment CT differential diagnosis of tuberculous peritonitis from peritoneal carcinomatosis of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Diagnosis of Tuberculous Pleurisy and in the Differential Diagnosis between Tuberculous Pleurisy and Pleural Metastasis from Lung Adenocarcinoma.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Visual PET/CT scoring of mesenteric fdg uptake to differentiate between tuberculous peritonitis and peritoneal carcinomatosis.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2020Article
- Abdominal Tuberculosis Mimicking Cancer Clinically and on Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Imaging: A Two-Case Series.The American journal of case reports · 2020Article
- Peritoneal Tuberculosis: A Forsaken Yet Misleading Diagnosis.Case reports in oncological medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTuberculous peritonitis (TBP) mimics peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). We aimed to investigate the discriminative use of PET/CT findings in the parietal peritoneum. MATERIALS AND
methodsParietal peritoneal PET/CT findings from 76 patients with TBP (n = 25) and PC (n = 51) were retrospectively reviewed. The lesion locations were noted as right subdiaphragmatic, left subdiaphragmatic, right paracolic gutters, left paracolic gutters, and pelvic regions. The distribution characteristic consisted of a dominant distribution in the pelvic and/or right subdiaphragmatic region (susceptible area for peritoneal implantation, SAPI) (SAPI distribution), a dominant distribution in the remaining regions (less-susceptible area for peritoneal implantation, LSAPI) (LSAPI distribution), or a uniform distribution. PET morphological patterns were classified as F18-fluorodeoxyglucose (F-FDG) uptake in a long beaded line (string-of-beads F-FDG uptake) or in a cluster (clustered F-FDG uptake) or focal F-FDG uptake. CT patterns included smooth uniform thickening, irregular thickening, or nodules.
resultsMore common findings in the parietal peritoneum corresponding to TBP as opposed to PC were (a) ≥4 involved regions (80.0% vs 19.6%), (b) uniform distribution (72.0% vs 5.9%), (c) string-of-beads F-FDG uptake (76.0% vs 7.8%), and (d) smooth uniform thickening (60.0% vs 7.8%) (all P < 0.001), whereas more frequent findings in PC compared with TBP were (a) SAPI distribution (78.4% vs 28.0%), (b) clustered F-FDG uptake (56.9% vs 20.0%), (c) focal F-FDG uptake (21.6% vs 4.0%), (d) irregular thickening (51.0% vs 12.0%), and (e) nodules (21.6% vs 4.0%) (P < 0.001, P < 0.05, P > 0.05, P < 0.05, P > 0.05, respectively).
conclusionOur data show that PET/CT findings in the parietal peritoneum are useful for differentiating between TBP and PC.
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.