ArticleCurrent medical science2018
Whole Body Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT) in the Evaluation of Ophthalmic Tumors.
Article in Current medical science, 2018. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Diagnosing and Managing Primary Posterior Uveal Melanoma.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The clinical value of whole body positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) as an imaging tool in diagnosis of ophthalmic tumors was investigated. The retrospective observational case series were performed on the patients with suspected ophthalmic tumors who underwent whole body PET/CT. The golden standard of diagnosis was the final pathological diagnosis or the results of long-term follow-up for patients without surgery/biopsy. PET/CT findings were compared with the golden standard. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and positive likelihood ratio of PET/CT in the detection of ophthalmic tumors were calculated. The clinical application of PET/CT in different types of ophthalmic tumors was evaluated. The results showed that 30 patients (18 males and 12 females) with a mean age of 43.0 years (range 4-63 years) were collected. The mean sizes of orbital tumors and intraocular tumors were 26.8 mm×17.8 mm and 11.2 mm×6.1 mm, respectively. The overall sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and positive likelihood ratio of whole body PET/CT in ophthalmic tumors were 76.5%, 71.4%, 75.0% and 2.67, and were 62.5%, 100% and 70.0% in intraocular tumors, and those were 100%, 60.0% and 84.6% in orbital tumors, respectively. PET/CT findings were applied to help make appropriate treatment options in 27 out of 30 patients (90.0%), and 12 (40.0%) patients changed the treatment strategy. False negative results in 4 cases and false positive results in 2 cases were observed in this series. It was suggested that PET/CT was an effective imaging modality in detecting, diagnosing and developing therapeutic schedule for patients with ophthalmic tumors. It was more sensitive and accurate for detecting orbital tumors than for detecting intraocular tumors.
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.