ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2022
Multimodality imaging to distinguish between benign and malignant cardiac masses.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Pooled it
- Advancing cardiac tumor diagnosis: evaluatingAmerican journal of cardiovascular disease · 2026Review
- Case Report: Leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava presenting as a right atrial mass: the value of multimodality imaging.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Incidental detection of left ventricular metastasis from lung squamous cell carcinoma on FDG PET/CT: A rare case report.Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology · 2026Article
- Hybrid cardiovascular imaging. A clinical consensus statement of the european association of nuclear medicine (EANM) and the european association of cardiovascular imaging (EACVI) of the ESC.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Review
- Multimodality Imaging in Right Heart Tumors: Proposed Algorithm towards an Appropriate Diagnosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Cardiac Masses and Pseudomasses: An Overview about Diagnostic Imaging and Clinical Background.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Review
- Multimodality cardiac imaging for the management of cardiac masses.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2022: positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Review
- Value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) in the differential diagnosis of sarcoidosis and lung cancer with lymph node metastasis: a retrospective study.Translational lung cancer research · 2022Article
- Combined PET and MRI for the masses! : At least for the cardiac ones.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of CMR and FDG-PET/CT and their complementary role to distinguish benign vs malignant cardiac masses.
methodsRetrospectively assessed patients with cardiac mass who underwent CMR and FDG-PET/CT within a month between 2003 and 2018.
results72 patients who had CMR and FDG-PET/CT were included. 25 patients (35%) were diagnosed with benign and 47 (65%) were diagnosed with malignant masses. 56 patients had histological correlation: 9 benign and 47 malignant masses. CMR and FDG-PET/CT had a high accuracy in differentiating benign vs malignant masses, with the presence of CMR features demonstrating a higher sensitivity (98%), while FDG uptake with SUVmax/blood pool ≥ 3.0 demonstrating a high specificity (88%). Combining multiple (> 4) CMR features and FDG uptake (SUVmax/blood pool ratio ≥ 3.0) yielded a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 88% to diagnose malignant masses. Over a mean follow-up of 2.6 years (IQR 0.3-3.8 years), risk-adjusted mortality were highest among patients with an infiltrative border on CMR (adjusted HR 3.1; 95% CI 1.5-6.5; P = .002) or focal extracardiac FDG uptake (adjusted HR 3.8; 95% CI 1.9-7.7; P < .001).
conclusionAlthough CMR and FDG-PET/CT can independently diagnose benign and malignant masses, the combination of these modalities provides complementary value in select cases.
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.