ArticleBMC medical imaging2018
Use of
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of quantitative [Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are no objective and accurate rating tools for permanent impairment of traumatized ankles. The purpose of this study is to assess the role of 18F-Sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) bone scans in evaluating patients with limited ankle range of motion (ROM) after trauma.
methods18F-NaF PET/CT was performed in 121 patients (75 men, 46 women; mean age: 45.8) who had ROM < 70% of normal after trauma affecting ankles. Metabolic target volume (MTV), the sum of voxels with standardized uptake value (SUV) > 2.5 was automatically obtained from the 3D volume that included the ankle joint. The maximum & mean SUV (SUVmax & SUVmean), and the total lesion activity (TLA) were measured.
resultsThe median period from injury to performing 18F-NaF PET/CT was 290 days. The causes of injury were as follows: fracture (N = 95), Achilles tendon rupture (N = 12), and ligament injury (N = 12). Hot uptake in the ankle was seen in 113 of 121 patients. The fracture group had higher SUVmax, SUVmean, and TLA values than the non-fracture group. More limited ROM correlated with higher hot-uptake parameters (SUVmax, SUVmean, TLA). In subgroup analysis, the same correlations were present in the fracture, but not in the non-fracture group.
conclusions18F-NaF PET/CT can provide considerable information in impairment evaluations of limited ankle ROM, particularly in fracture around the ankle. Thus, 18F-NaF bone PET/CT may provide an additional option as an objective imaging tool in disability assessment after ankle injury.
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.