ArticlePloS one2017
Variability in quantitative analysis of atherosclerotic plaque inflammation using 18F-FDG PET/CT.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodology Development for Investigating Pathophysiological [Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Interobserver Variability in Cardiovascular FDG PET/CT Analysis in Large Vessel Vasculitis.Global heart · 2025Article
- Article
- Arterial wall inflammation is increased in rheumatoid arthritis compared with osteoarthritis, as a marker of early atherosclerosis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- A prediction tool for plaque progression based on patient-specific multi-physical modeling.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Should vascular wallThe international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2020Article
- Global quantification of pulmonary artery atherosclerosis usingAmerican journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020Article
- Clinical Factors Associated with Time-Specific Distribution of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose in Large-Vessel Vasculitis.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Technical considerations for quantification ofJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019Article
- FDG-PET/CT(A) imaging in large vessel vasculitis and polymyalgia rheumatica: joint procedural recommendation of the EANM, SNMMI, and the PET Interest Group (PIG), and endorsed by the ASNC.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2018Review
- Protection from Psoriasis-Related Thrombosis after Inhibition of IL-23 or IL-17A.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background18F-FDG-PET(/CT) is increasingly used in studies aiming at quantifying atherosclerotic plaque inflammation. Considerable methodological variability exists. The effect of data acquisition and image analysis parameters on quantitative uptake measures, such as standardized uptake value (SUV) and target-to-background ratio (TBR) has not been investigated extensively.
objectiveThe goal of this study was to explore the effect of several data acquisition and image analysis parameters on quantification of vascular wall 18F-FDG uptake measures, in order to increase awareness of potential variability.
methodsThree whole-body emission scans and a low-dose CT scan were acquired 38, 60 and 90 minutes after injection of 18F-FDG in six rheumatoid arthritis patients with high cardiovascular risk profiles.Data acquisition (1 and 2) and image analysis (3, 4 and 5) parameters comprised:1. 18F-FDG uptake time, 2. SUV normalisation, 3. drawing regions/volumes of interest (ROI's/VOI's) according to: a. hot-spot (HS), b. whole-segment (WS) and c. most-diseased segment (MDS), 4. Background activity, 5. Image matrix/voxel size.Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC's) and Bland Altman plots were used to assess agreement between these techniques and between observers. A linear mixed model was used to determine the association between uptake time and continuous outcome variables.
results1. Significantly higher TBRmax values were found at 90 minutes (1,57 95%CI 1,35-1,80) compared to 38 minutes (1,30 95%CI 1,21-1,39) (P = 0,024) 2. Normalising SUV for BW, LBM and BSA significantly influences average SUVmax (2,25 (±0,60) vs 1,67 (±0,37) vs 0,058 (±0,013)). 3. Intraclass correlation coefficients were high in all vascular segments when SUVmax HS was compared to SUVmax WS. SUVmax HS was consistently higher than SUVmax MDS in all vascular segments. 4. Blood pool activity significantly decreases in all (venous and arterial) segments over time, but does not differ between segments. 5. Image matrix/voxel size does not influence SUVmax.
conclusionQuantitative measures of vascular wall 18F-FDG uptake are affected mainly by changes in data acquisition parameters. Standardization of methodology needs to be considered when studying atherosclerosis and/or vasculitis.
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.