Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34527587›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Diagnostic Value of Delayed PET/MR in Liver Metastasis in Comparison With PET/CT.

Nina Zhou, Xiangxi Meng, Yan Zhang, Boqi Yu, Jianmin Yuan, Jiangyuan Yu, Hua Zhu, Zhi Yang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Added value of regionalEuropean journal of hybrid imaging · 2023
    Article
  6. Annals of translational medicine · 2022
    Article
  7. The Value ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Nina ZhouKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Xiangxi MengKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Yan ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Boqi YuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Jianmin YuanCentral Research Institute, United Imaging Healthcare Group, Shanghai, China.
Jiangyuan YuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Hua ZhuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Zhi YangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), NMPA Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Radiopharmaceuticals (National Medical Products Administration), Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the value of a delayed positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) scan relative to a single positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scan for liver metastasis detection.

methodsIn this study, 70 patients with solid malignancies and suspicious liver lesions undergoing 2-deoxy-2-[

results(1) The standard of reference revealed 208 liver lesions in 70 patients (metastasis in 56 patients with 196 lesions; benign in 14 patients with 12 lesions). Compared with PET/CT, PET/MR had higher accuracy (98.6%

conclusionsIn liver metastasis detection, the diagnostic value of the delayed PET/MR is validated to be superior to that of PET/CT, which may aid the clinical decision-making.

Indexed as

comparative studydelayed PET scanliver metastasisPET/CTPET/MR

Identifiers

PMID34527587
PMCPMC8435726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.